/resolve-reviews

name: resolve-reviews
description: Resolve all PR review comments (human and bot) on current PR. Fetches unanswered comments, evaluates each one, fixes real issues, dismisses false positives, and replies to every comment with the outcome.
license: MIT
compatibility: Requires git, gh (GitHub CLI), and Node.js installed.
allowed-tools: Bash(npx agent-reviews *) Bash(pnpm dlx agent-reviews *) Bash(yarn dlx agent-reviews *) Bash(bunx agent-reviews *) Bash(git config *) Bash(git add *) Bash(git commit *) Bash(git push *)
metadata:
  author: pbakaus
  version: "1.1.0"
  homepage: https://github.com/pbakaus/agent-reviews

Automatically resolve all review comments (both human and bot) on the current PR. Uses a two-phase workflow: fix all existing issues, then poll for new ones until quiet.

Prerequisites

All commands below use `npx agent-reviews`. If the project uses a different package manager, substitute the appropriate runner (e.g., `pnpm dlx agent-reviews` for pnpm, `yarn dlx agent-reviews` for Yarn, `bunx agent-reviews` for Bun). Honor the user's package manager preference throughout.

**Cloud environments only** (e.g., Codespaces, remote agents): verify git author identity so CI checks can map commits to the user. Run `git config --global --get user.email` and if empty or a placeholder, set it manually. Skip this check in local environments.

Phase 1: FETCH & FIX (synchronous)

Step 1: Fetch All Comments (Expanded)

Run `npx agent-reviews --unanswered --expanded`

The CLI auto-detects the current branch, finds the associated PR, and authenticates via `gh` CLI or environment variables. If anything fails (no token, no PR, CLI not installed), it exits with a clear error message.

This shows all unanswered comments (both human and bot) with full detail: complete comment body (no truncation), diff hunk (code context), and all replies. Each comment shows its ID in brackets (e.g., `[12345678]`).

If zero comments are returned, print "No unanswered comments found" and skip to Phase 2.

Step 3: Process Each Unanswered Comment

For each comment from the expanded output, apply the appropriate evaluation based on whether the author is a bot or a human.

For Bot Comments

Read the referenced code and determine:

1. **TRUE POSITIVE** - A real bug that needs fixing 2. **FALSE POSITIVE** - Not actually a bug (intentional behavior, bot misunderstanding) 3. **UNCERTAIN** - Not sure; ask the user

**Likely TRUE POSITIVE:**

• Code obviously violates stated behavior
• Missing null checks on potentially undefined values
• Type mismatches or incorrect function signatures
• Logic errors in conditionals
• Missing error handling for documented failure cases

**Likely FALSE POSITIVE:**

• Bot doesn't understand the framework/library patterns
• Code is intentionally structured that way (with comments explaining why)
• Bot is flagging style preferences, not bugs
• The "bug" is actually a feature or intentional behavior
• Bot misread the code flow

For Human Comments

Read the referenced code and the reviewer's comment. Human reviewers are generally more accurate and context-aware than bots. Determine:

1. **ACTIONABLE** - The reviewer identified a real issue or requested a concrete change 2. **DISCUSSION** - The comment raises a valid point but the right approach is unclear 3. **ALREADY ADDRESSED** - The concern has already been fixed or is no longer relevant

**Likely ACTIONABLE:**

• Reviewer points out a bug or logic error
• Reviewer requests a specific code change
• Reviewer identifies missing edge cases or error handling

**Likely DISCUSSION -- ask the user:**

• Reviewer suggests an architectural change you're unsure about
• Comment involves a tradeoff (performance vs readability, etc.)
• The feedback is subjective without team consensus

When UNCERTAIN -- ask the user

For both bot and human comments:

• The fix would require architectural changes
• You're genuinely unsure if the behavior is intentional
• Multiple valid interpretations exist
• The fix could have unintended side effects

Act on Evaluation

**If TRUE POSITIVE / ACTIONABLE:** Fix the code. Track the comment ID and a brief description of the fix.

**If FALSE POSITIVE:** Do NOT change the code. Track the comment ID and the reason it's not a real bug.

**If DISCUSSION:** Ask the user to consult the PR author. Apply their decision and track it.

**If ALREADY ADDRESSED:** Track the comment ID and note why.

**If UNCERTAIN:** Ask the user. If they say skip, track it as skipped.

Do NOT reply to comments yet. Replies happen after the commit (Step 5).

Step 4: Commit and Push

After evaluating and fixing ALL unanswered comments:

1. Run your project's lint and type-check 2. Stage, commit, and push:

   git add -A
   git commit -m "fix: address PR review findings

   {List of changes made, grouped by reviewer/bot}"
   git push

3. Capture the commit hash from the output.

Step 5: Reply to All Comments

Before posting to an inline review comment, fetch `npx agent-reviews --detail <comment_id>` and inspect the latest replies. PR-level issue comments and review summaries have no threaded reply list; an empty list for these types is not evidence that no outcome was recorded. The CLI skips replies to those types. Record that skip and do not create a replacement top-level comment or use another tool to bypass it. If the same outcome is already recorded, do not post it again. On a resumed session, use the fresh unanswered list instead of replaying a prior session's work queue. Revisit a decision only when new discussion or a user request calls for it.

For multiline or complex replies, write the exact reply text to a uniquely named UTF-8 file in a temporary directory outside the repository and use `npx agent-reviews --reply <comment_id> --body-file <path_to_reply_file>` (adding `--resolve` only where appropriate below). The CLI accepts absolute and relative paths; prefer an absolute path for the outsi