--- name: pr-review-comments description: Posts review findings from a JSON file as inline comments on a GitHub Pull Request, attaching each comment to its file and line. Use when you have a list/JSON of review findings (each with a file path, line number, and a message such as summary/failure_scenario) and want them published on a PR as inline review comments. Triggers include "post these review comments on the PR", "associate comments to files in the PR", "publish review findings to PR #N", or having a JSON array of {file, line, summary} to turn into PR comments. allowed-tools: Read, Write, Bash --- # PR Review Comments Publish a JSON array of review findings as inline comments on a GitHub Pull Request, each anchored to its file and line. Uses the GitHub API through the authenticated `gh` CLI, so no token handling is needed. ## Prerequisites - `gh` CLI installed and authenticated (`gh auth status`). The script auto-detects the repo with `gh repo view`; pass `--repo OWNER/REPO` to override. - The PR number to comment on. - A JSON file: an **array** of objects. Required keys per object: `file`, `line`. Message comes from `summary` and/or `failure_scenario` (combined into the body), or an explicit `body`. See [references/json-schema.md](references/json-schema.md) for the full schema and a sample. ## Key constraint: only diff lines are commentable GitHub only accepts an inline comment if the target line is part of the PR's diff. `line` is the line number in the **new** file (use `side: "LEFT"` for removed lines). The script fetches the PR diff, validates every finding against the actual hunks, and **skips** any whose line is outside the diff — reporting them at the end so nothing is lost silently. There is no way to attach a line comment to an unchanged, undiffed line. ## Workflow 1. Confirm the JSON path and the PR number. If the repo isn't obvious, run `gh repo view`. 2. **Dry-run first** to see what will be posted and what gets skipped: ```bash scripts/post_pr_comments.py --pr --json --dry-run ``` 3. Review the "Postable" / "Skipped" counts with the user. If lines were skipped because the diff moved, the line numbers in the JSON may be stale — reconcile before posting. 4. Post for real, choosing the mode (see below): ```bash # Grouped (default): one PR review bundling all comments scripts/post_pr_comments.py --pr --json --event COMMENT # Individual: one separate inline comment per finding scripts/post_pr_comments.py --pr --json --mode individual ``` 5. Report back the created review/comment URLs and the list of any skipped findings. ## Choosing the mode | Mode | Endpoint | Use when | |------|----------|----------| | `grouped` (default) | `POST /pulls/{n}/reviews` | Publishing a set of findings as one review. One notification; can set `--event APPROVE \| REQUEST_CHANGES \| COMMENT`. | | `individual` | `POST /pulls/{n}/comments` | Adding standalone comments incrementally, or when each finding should be its own thread/notification. | Default to `grouped` with `--event COMMENT` unless the user wants a verdict or separate threads. ## Options reference ``` --pr N PR number (required) --json PATH JSON array of findings (required) --repo OWNER/REPO Override auto-detected repo --mode grouped|individual Default: grouped --event COMMENT|APPROVE|REQUEST_CHANGES Grouped-mode verdict (default COMMENT) --review-body TEXT Top-level summary body for the grouped review --commit SHA Commit to anchor to (default: PR head SHA) --dry-run Validate and print payloads without posting ``` ## Notes - Multi-line range comments: include `start_line` (and optional `start_side`) in the JSON object alongside `line`; the script passes them through. - Always `--dry-run` before a real post on an unfamiliar PR — stale line numbers are the most common failure and the dry-run surfaces them as "skipped" without side effects. - The script is the reliable path; don't hand-roll `gh api` calls for this — it handles diff validation, repo/commit detection, and body assembly consistently.