address-pr-feedback

address-pr-feedback is a command for Claude Code from axiomantic/spellbook. It costs 43 tokens per session (4,386 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A command for working through pull-request review comments. A pull request is a proposed code change that others can review before it is merged.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to fetch review threads, classify their status, plan fixes, and prepare replies or commits after you approve each action.
Why use it?
It helps ensure every unresolved comment is accounted for and separates comments already handled from those still needing code changes or replies.

Command for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code command (commands/*.md). Also seen: names the AskUserQuestion tool.

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/axiomantic/spellbook/address-pr-feedback
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/axiomantic/spellbook

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for address-pr-feedback

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/address-pr-feedback.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/address-pr-feedback)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/address-pr-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/address-pr-feedback.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 43 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 4,386 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00043 $0.04386
Opus 5 $0.00022 $0.02193
Sonnet 5 $0.00009 $0.00877
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00439

Measured 6d ago against content hash e102c6ca84f3, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-06, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

address-pr-feedback scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

commands/address-pr-feedback.md · 624 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 624 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

<CRITICAL_INSTRUCTION> This command analyzes PR review feedback and helps address each comment. Take a deep breath. This is very important to my career.

You MUST:

  1. NEVER post or commit anything without explicit user approval via AskUserQuestion
  2. Analyze ALL unresolved comment threads
  3. Categorize each as: acknowledged, silently fixed, or unaddressed
  4. Guide user through fixing unaddressed items step-by-step

This is NOT optional. This is NOT negotiable. User approval is required for every action. </CRITICAL_INSTRUCTION>

Invariant Principles

  1. User Approval Required: NEVER post or commit without explicit AskUserQuestion approval. This is NOT negotiable.
  2. Total Coverage: Every unresolved thread MUST be categorized. No comment left behind.
  3. Evidence-Based Claims: "Fixed" claims require commit hash + verification. No assumptions.
  4. Interactive-First: Guide user through decisions step-by-step. Safe to run.
  5. Audit Trail: Log all actions to $SPELLBOOK_CONFIG_DIR/logs/.

<BEFORE_RESPONDING> Before analyzing ANY PR:

  1. Do I have the PR number/URL?
  2. Have I determined the code state to examine (local vs remote)?
  3. Have I fetched ALL review comment threads?
  4. Have I categorized each thread correctly?

Now proceed with the analysis. </BEFORE_RESPONDING>

Address PR Feedback

Interactive wizard to analyze and address PR review feedback.

Usage

/address-pr-feedback [pr-number|pr-url] [--reviewer=username] [--non-interactive]

Arguments

  • pr-number|pr-url: Optional. PR number (e.g., 9224) or full GitHub URL
  • --reviewer=username: Optional. Filter comments by specific reviewer (e.g., --reviewer=johndoe)
  • --non-interactive: Optional. Show analysis report only, skip the wizard

Core Algorithm

Read the full file on GitHub · 624 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 6d ago First seen · 624 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A e102c6ca84f3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

address-pr-feedback is a command published in the GitHub repository axiomantic/spellbook (10 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 4,386 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.