PR Review Handler

Fetches PR review comments from GitHub, evaluates if they are valid and actionable, then proposes solutions for valid comments with user approval before applying changes.

Quick Start

/pr-review-handler 123

Or simply ask: "Help me address the review comments on PR #123"

Instructions

Step 1: Fetch PR Review Comments

Use the GitHub CLI to fetch review comments for the specified PR:

# Get PR review comments
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json reviews,comments

# Get detailed review comments on specific lines
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/comments

Extract the following for each comment:

• Comment body/content
• File path and line number (if applicable)
• Author
• State (pending, commented, approved, changes_requested)
• Created/updated timestamp

Step 2: Analyze Comment Validity

For each review comment, evaluate if it is valid and actionable:

Valid comments typically:

• Point out actual bugs, logic errors, or security issues
• Suggest performance improvements with clear reasoning
• Identify missing error handling or edge cases
• Request necessary code style/convention fixes
• Ask for clarification that would improve code readability
• Suggest better naming or structure improvements

Invalid or non-actionable comments:

• Purely stylistic preferences without project convention backing
• Already addressed in subsequent commits
• Based on misunderstanding of the code or requirements
• Requests for changes outside the PR's scope
• Nitpicks that don't improve code quality

For each comment, determine:

1. Is it actionable? (Can code changes address it?)
2. Is it reasonable? (Does the suggestion improve the code?)
3. Is it still relevant? (Not already addressed?)

Step 3: Present Analysis to User

Display a summary table of all comments:

| # | File | Comment Summary | Valid? | Reason |
|---|------|-----------------|--------|--------|
| 1 | src/api/user.ts:45 | Add null check | ✅ Yes | Prevents runtime error |
| 2 | src/utils.ts:12 | Rename variable | ❌ No | Style preference only |
| 3 | src/auth.ts:89 | Handle timeout | ✅ Yes | Missing error handling |

Step 4: Propose Solutions for Valid Comments

For each valid comment:

1. Read the relevant code at the specified file and line
2. Understand the context - what the code does and why
3. Design a solution that addresses the reviewer's concern
4. Present the proposed change to the user:

## Comment #1: Add null check

**File:** src/api/user.ts:45
**Reviewer:** @reviewer-name
**Comment:** "This could throw if user is undefined"

### Current Code:

\`\`\`typescript
const name = user.name;
\`\`\`

### Proposed Solution:

\`\`\`typescript
const name = user?.name ?? 'Unknown';
\`\`\`

### Explanation:

Added optional chaining and nullish coalescing to handle undefined user gracefully.

**Apply this change?** [Yes / No / Modify]

Step 5: Apply Approved Changes

After user approval:

1. Apply the code changes using the Edit tool
2. Run relevant linting/type-checking if configured
3. Summarize all applied changes

Step 6: Generate Response Summary

After processing all comments, provide:

• Count of valid vs invalid comments
• List of applied changes
• Any comments that need manual attention
• Suggested reply to reviewers (if requested)

Examples

Example 1: Basic Usage

User: Help me handle the review comments on PR #42

Claude:

1. Fetches comments from PR #42
2. Analyzes each comment for validity
3. Presents summary table
4. For each valid comment, proposes a solution
5. Waits for user approval before applying

Example 2: With Specific Focus

User: Address only the security-related comments on PR #15

Claude:

1. Fetches all comments from PR #15
2. Filters for security-related concerns
3. Analyzes and proposes solutions for those specifically

Best Practices

• Don't blindly accept all comments - Use judgment to identify truly valuable feedback
• Preserve code intent - Solutions should fix issues without changing the original purpose
• Consider the reviewer's perspective - Understand why they raised the concern
• Group related changes - If multiple comments affect the same area, propose a unified solution
• Explain your reasoning - When marking a comment as invalid, provide clear justification

Edge Cases

Comment already addressed:

• Check git diff to see if subsequent commits fixed it
• Mark as "Already resolved" with commit reference

Conflicting comments:

• Present both perspectives to the user
• Ask for guidance on which direction to take

Comment requires architectural change:

• Flag as "Requires discussion"
• Don't propose quick fixes for fundamental issues

Comment on deleted code:

• Mark as "No longer applicable"
• Note that the code was removed

Commands Reference

# List PR review comments
gh pr view <NUMBER> --json reviews

# Get line-level comments
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<NUMBER>/comments

# Get PR diff for context
gh pr diff <NUMBER>

# Check PR status
gh pr checks <NUMBER>