/fix-pr
Resolve the findings on an existing pull request - review comments, CI failures, and self-review findings - driving each to a decision (fix / defer to a tracked issue / discard), re-verifying the gates, replying to each reviewer, and watching for late feedback. The counterpart
$ npx -y skills add theam/claude-dev-kit --skill fix-pr --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/fix-pr
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Resolve the findings on an existing pull request - review comments, CI failures, and self-review findings - driving each to a decision (fix / defer to a tracked issue / discard), re-verifying the gates, replying to each reviewer, and watching for late feedback. The counterpart
SKILL.md
fix-pr.SKILL.mdname: fix-pr
description: Resolve the findings on an existing pull request - review comments, CI failures, and self-review findings - driving each to a decision (fix / defer to a tracked issue / discard), re-verifying the gates, replying to each reviewer, and watching for late feedback. The counterpart to pr-review that closes the loop.
Fix PR
Drive a PR's feedback to done: run a review, triage **every** item to a decision, fix what deserves fixing, file what deserves doing later, discard what deserves nothing, answer every reviewer, and re-check after pushing in case late feedback (bots, CI) arrives. The bar for correctness is high; the bar for new machinery is low — fix the defect, don't redesign around it.
1. Establish the PR intent (the scope ruler)
Write one or two sentences: **what this PR is for, and what it deliberately does not change** — derived from the title, body, linked issue, and the diff. Every scope call below is measured against it. If the intent is genuinely ambiguous, ask the author before triaging.
2. Gather the findings
Collect from every surface, deduplicated. Commands below are for `github` (`prHost` in `.claude/dev-kit.json`); for **bitbucket** use the REST API (`/pullrequests/{id}` comments, `/statuses`), for **gitlab** `glab mr view/checks`.
1. **CI failures**: `gh pr checks <pr>` — read the failing job logs, not just the status. 2. **Review feedback**: unresolved inline threads, review summary bodies, and PR conversation comments — bots included (`gh pr view <pr> --comments`, `gh api` for threads). Keep outdated threads: the code moved, the concern may not have. 3. **Self-review findings** handed over by the caller (the `pr-review` pass).
3. Build the ledger
One row per **distinct claim**, merging duplicates across sources (if the review pass and a human flagged the same defect, that's one row citing both — and the human's thread still gets a reply):
| id | source | file:line | claim | category | verdict |
Assign exactly one verdict per row — nothing stays undecided:
- **`FIX_NOW`** — fix it in this PR.
- **`DEFER_TO_ISSUE`** — real value, wrong moment → a tracked issue.
- **`DISCARD`** — not worth anyone's time; no fix, no issue.
**Never `DISCARD`** (from `instructions/secure-coding.md` + `instructions/testing-standards.md`): security/data-exposure, serious performance regressions, duplication this PR introduces, and missing test coverage for behavior it changes (when the project has tests). Only defer one of these when the fix is genuinely a separate project — and say so, treating the PR as blocked on the author's call, not quietly filing an issue.
Show the classified ledger before touching code — the cheapest moment to correct a bad call.
4. Ask about scope conflicts
Batch every fix that would push past the PR's intent into **one** round of questions (AskUserQuestion) with your recommendation. Don't widen scope silently.
5. Fix
Smallest correct change per `FIX_NOW`, following the repo's conventions and the kit instructions. Add/update the tests that prove each fix (a test that fails without it); keep touched files at the project's coverage bar (adaptive — see `testing-standards.md`). One commit per coherent group; push to the PR branch. No opportunistic refactors, no force-push/amend/rebase of remote commits.
6. Answer every reviewer (consent-first)
Reply to each human/bot comment with the decision taken, then resolve the thread. **Show the exact replies and get confirmation before posting to GitHub** (in `--auto-approve` pipeline runs, post them and flag prominently in the report). Never resolve someone else's thread without a reply. A finding you believe is wrong gets a reasoned reply, not silence.
7. File deferred work
For each `DEFER_TO_ISSUE`, confirm the batch with the user, then create a tracked issue **via the configured tracker** (the `issue-*` adapters / `.claude/dev-kit.json`) — or the PR host's issues — and link it from the reply.
8. Re-verify the gates
Same as `create-pr`, adaptive to the project: unit tests for touched files pass; `coverage-check` holds the project's bar with no regression; related e2e pass if user-facing and the project does e2e; lint clean; no suppressions to dodge a gate.
9. Watch for late feedback, then loop
Bots and CI often post minutes after a push. Right after pushing, run the bundled watcher in the background (it ships with the plugin at `"$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT"/scripts/watch-pr-feedback.sh`):
BASELINE=<ledger github ids> "$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT"/scripts/watch-pr-feedback.sh <pr>
Read its exit code: **10** = new feedback (printed) → back to step 3 with the new items; **20** = a bot signalled all-clear (👍 on the PR / approving review); **0** = ten quiet minutes; **30** = inconclusive → re-run it. Only close out on **0** or **20** from a window covering the last push. (GitHub only; for other hosts, do a single post-push re-check instead.)
10. Report
Account for **every** ledger row (fixed / deferred+issue link / discarded+why / answered), the verification evidence, how the feedback window closed, and the PR URL. Never report the PR clean while blocking threads remain open.
Read more
name: fix-pr description: Resolve the findings on an existing pull request - review comments, CI failures, and self-review findings - driving each to a decision (fix / defer to a tracked issue / discard), re-verifying the gates, replying to each reviewer, and watching for late feedback. The counterpart to pr-review that closes the loop.
Fix PR
Drive a PR's feedback to done: run a review, triage **every** item to a decision, fix what deserves fixing, file what deserves doing later, discard what deserves nothing, answer every reviewer, and re-check after pushing in case late feedback (bots, CI) arrives. The bar for correctness is high; the bar for new machinery is low — fix the defect, don't redesign around it.
1. Establish the PR intent (the scope ruler)
Write one or two sentences: **what this PR is for, and what it deliberately does not change** — derived from the title, body, linked issue, and the diff. Every scope call below is measured against it. If the intent is genuinely ambiguous, ask the author before triaging.
2. Gather the findings
Collect from every surface, deduplicated. Commands below are for `github` (`prHost` in `.claude/dev-kit.json`); for **bitbucket** use the REST API (`/pullrequests/{id}` comments, `/statuses`), for **gitlab** `glab mr view/checks`.
1. **CI failures**: `gh pr checks <pr>` — read the failing job logs, not just the status. 2. **Review feedback**: unresolved inline threads, review summary bodies, and PR conversation comments — bots included (`gh pr view <pr> --comments`, `gh api` for threads). Keep outdated threads: the code moved, the concern may not have. 3. **Self-review findings** handed over by the caller (the `pr-review` pass).
3. Build the ledger
One row per **distinct claim**, merging duplicates across sources (if the review pass and a human flagged the same defect, that's one row citing both — and the human's thread still gets a reply):
| id | source | file:line | claim | category | verdict |
Assign exactly one verdict per row — nothing stays undecided:
- **`FIX_NOW`** — fix it in this PR.
- **`DEFER_TO_ISSUE`** — real value, wrong moment → a tracked issue.
- **`DISCARD`** — not worth anyone's time; no fix, no issue.
**Never `DISCARD`** (from `instructions/secure-coding.md` + `instructions/testing-standards.md`): security/data-exposure, serious performance regressions, duplication this PR introduces, and missing test coverage for behavior it changes (when the project has tests). Only defer one of these when the fix is genuinely a separate project — and say so, treating the PR as blocked on the author's call, not quietly filing an issue.
Show the classified ledger before touching code — the cheapest moment to correct a bad call.
4. Ask about scope conflicts
Batch every fix that would push past the PR's intent into **one** round of questions (AskUserQuestion) with your recommendation. Don't widen scope silently.
5. Fix
Smallest correct change per `FIX_NOW`, following the repo's conventions and the kit instructions. Add/update the tests that prove each fix (a test that fails without it); keep touched files at the project's coverage bar (adaptive — see `testing-standards.md`). One commit per coherent group; push to the PR branch. No opportunistic refactors, no force-push/amend/rebase of remote commits.
6. Answer every reviewer (consent-first)
Reply to each human/bot comment with the decision taken, then resolve the thread. **Show the exact replies and get confirmation before posting to GitHub** (in `--auto-approve` pipeline runs, post them and flag prominently in the report). Never resolve someone else's thread without a reply. A finding you believe is wrong gets a reasoned reply, not silence.
7. File deferred work
For each `DEFER_TO_ISSUE`, confirm the batch with the user, then create a tracked issue **via the configured tracker** (the `issue-*` adapters / `.claude/dev-kit.json`) — or the PR host's issues — and link it from the reply.
8. Re-verify the gates
Same as `create-pr`, adaptive to the project: unit tests for touched files pass; `coverage-check` holds the project's bar with no regression; related e2e pass if user-facing and the project does e2e; lint clean; no suppressions to dodge a gate.
9. Watch for late feedback, then loop
Bots and CI often post minutes after a push. Right after pushing, run the bundled watcher in the background (it ships with the plugin at `"$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT"/scripts/watch-pr-feedback.sh`):
BASELINE=<ledger github ids> "$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT"/scripts/watch-pr-feedback.sh <pr>
Read its exit code: **10** = new feedback (printed) → back to step 3 with the new items; **20** = a bot signalled all-clear (👍 on the PR / approving review); **0** = ten quiet minutes; **30** = inconclusive → re-run it. Only close out on **0** or **20** from a window covering the last push. (GitHub only; for other hosts, do a single post-push re-check instead.)
10. Report
Account for **every** ledger row (fixed / deferred+issue link / discarded+why / answered), the verification evidence, how the feedback window closed, and the PR URL. Never report the PR clean while blocking threads remain open.
An open-source Claude Code plugin by The Agile Monkeys: a stack-agnostic issue-to-PR workflow with enforced quality gates.
Repo: theam/claude-dev-kit
Other skills on fullstack-dev-kit.
- /coverage-check
Run the repo's unit tests with coverage and verify that every file touched in the current change keeps line, branch, and function coverage at or above 95%. Language- and framework-agnostic. Use before committing, before PR creation, or when the user asks about coverage.
Open skill - /create-pr
Create a branch, commit the work, and open a pull request for a completed user story, after all quality gates pass. Use when the user asks to open/create a PR or as the final step of the story workflow.
Open skill - /dev-kit-setup
First-use bootstrap for the dev kit. Detects the team's issue tracker, discovers what it can via MCP/CLI, asks only what cannot be discovered, and persists the result to .claude/dev-kit.json in the consuming repo. Use when that file is missing, when the user asks to set up or
Open skill - /e2e-generate
Create or update end-to-end tests for a user-facing flow that changed, using whatever e2e framework the repo already uses. Use after implementing a user story that alters UI behavior, routing, forms, or API-driven views.
Open skill - /figma-fetch
Extract frame/component structure and all visible text from a Figma design URL. Use whenever a prompt or a fetched issue contains a figma.com/design or figma.com/file link.
Open skill - /issue-fetch
Fetch a work item (summary, status, description, acceptance criteria, comments) from the team's issue tracker and display a clean summary. Supports Jira, Linear, GitHub Issues, and Azure DevOps via adapters. Use whenever a prompt contains an issue reference (e.g. PROJ-1234,
Open skill

