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.
npx agentmods add commands/metaschema-framework/claude-plugins/address-pr-feedbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/metaschema-framework/claude-pluginsWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/commands/metaschema-framework/claude-plugins/address-pr-feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/metaschema-framework/claude-plugins/address-pr-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/metaschema-framework/claude-plugins/address-pr-feedback.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01938 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00969 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00388 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00194 |
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 4d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 253 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Address PR Feedback Command
Address review feedback on the current PR, fix issues, and close resolved conversations.
Instructions
Execute the following steps to systematically address PR feedback:
Step 1: Identify the PR
Determine the current PR number:
# Get current branch
git branch --show-current
# Find PR for current branch
gh pr list --head $(git branch --show-current) --json number,title,url --jq '.[0]'
If no PR exists, STOP and inform the user.
Step 2: Fetch All Comments
Retrieve all comments on the PR (both file-level and general):
# Get PR number and repository info
PR_NUMBER=$(gh pr list --head $(git branch --show-current) --json number --jq '.[0].number')
REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner --jq '.nameWithOwner')
# Fetch file-level review comments (line-specific)
echo "=== File Review Comments ==="
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
--jq '.[] | {id: .id, type: "review", path: .path, line: .line, body: .body[0:300], user: .user.login, in_reply_to_id: .in_reply_to_id}'
# Fetch general PR comments (not tied to specific lines)
echo "=== General PR Comments ==="
gh api repos/$REPO/issues/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
--jq '.[] | {id: .id, type: "issue", body: .body[0:300], user: .user.login}'
Comment Types:
| Type | API Endpoint | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Review comments | /pulls/{id}/comments |
Line-specific comments on files |
| Issue comments | /issues/{id}/comments |
General PR-level discussion |
Step 3: Categorize Comments
Reference: See .claude/skills/pr-feedback.md for detailed categorization guidance.
Before implementing any feedback, verify technical claims (Step 2 in the skill):
- Automated reviewers can be wrong
- Check official docs or schema introspection before implementing
- Note incorrect feedback for the summary
Organize comments into categories:
| Category | Description | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| Blocking | Critical issues, bugs, security | Must fix before merge |
| Suggestions | Recommended improvements | Should address |
| Nits | Minor style/formatting | Address (shows attention to detail) |
| Questions | Needs clarification | Reply with answer |
| Incorrect | Verified as wrong | Explain why in response |
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 253 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A bd69ffe97643
address-pr-feedback is a command published in the GitHub repository metaschema-framework/claude-plugins (10 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed CC0-1.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,938 tokens. 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.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.