Work through review findings on a PR one at a time
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add Jartan-LLC/grimoire --skill address-review --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Address Review?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/jartan-llc-address-review)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: address-review
description: Work through review findings on a PR one at a time
argument-hint: PR number
---
# Address Review
Work through code review findings on a pull request, investigating each one and applying fixes where warranted.
**Always pause for the user's decision on each finding** -- even in auto mode, even if the reviewer or your own assessment recommends skipping. Auto mode grants tool access, not decision authority; the user decides what to fix, skip, or adjust.
## Process
### 1. Load Review
Determine the PR number from the user's request. Fetch the review comments:
```bash
gh pr view <pr-number> --comments
```
There may be multiple review comments in the history -- use only the most recent one. Parse its findings into a numbered list grouped by severity (Critical > Important > Minor).
### 2. Check Out Branch
Ensure the PR's branch is checked out locally so fixes can be applied.
### 3. Walk Through Findings
Work through each finding sequentially. For each one:
1. **Investigate** -- Read the relevant code. Understand whether the finding is a real problem, a theoretical concern, or a false positive. Check how the rest of the codebase handles the same pattern.
2. **Assess** -- Present your assessment to the user: is it a real issue, valid but not applicable here, or wrong? Propose a specific fix or recommend skipping, with reasoning.
3. **Act on user decision** -- Apply the fix, skip it, or adjust based on the user's response.
Do NOT blindly apply every suggestion. Investigate first -- the reviewer may have missed context, flagged a pattern that's intentional, or suggested a fix that creates inconsistency with the rest of the codebase.
When the user agrees to skip a finding, post a brief PR comment explaining why it was declined:
```bash
gh pr comment <pr-number> --body "**Re: <finding title>** -- <concise reason for skipping>"
```
### 4. Commit
The user may ask to commit at any point during the review -- commit what's been done so far and continue with the remaining findings. Use the format:
```text
fix(<scope>): address code review findings
```
Include a bulleted list of what was changed in the commit body. Never push unless the user explicitly asks.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!