github-pr-review

github-pr-review is a skill for Claude Code from fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills. It costs 95 tokens per session (2,836 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A workflow for handling comments left by reviewers on GitHub pull requests, which are proposed code changes awaiting review.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect pull-request comments and reviews, apply fixes, respond to reviewers, and check whether the pull request is ready.
Why use it?
It gathers and sorts feedback by severity so important issues are handled first and replies are tracked in the right discussion threads.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: dynamic context !`command`. Also seen: mentions Codex.

Part of the github-workflow plugin — 4 skills shipped together

not rated 72repo 1mo ago A scan Socket: passSnyk: warnSkillSpector: pass 95 tokens original MIT

Good fit Use it to inspect pull-request comments and reviews, apply fixes, respond to reviewers, and check whether the pull request is ready.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review
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.

Any agent
npx skills add fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills --skill github-pr-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install github-workflow, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 4 skills.

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 github-pr-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for github-pr-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills/github-pr-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 95 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,836 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • Socket pass 14 Sept 2026
  • Snyk warn 14 Sept 2026
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
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 $0.00095 $0.02836
Opus 5.5 $0.00038 $0.01134
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00019 $0.00567
Haiku 4.5 $0.00010 $0.00284

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 77cc65f1c2aa, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

github-pr-review 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 1mo 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

plugins/github-workflow/skills/github-pr-review/SKILL.md · 217 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 217 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

GitHub PR review

Resolves Pull Request review comments with severity-based prioritization, fix application, and thread replies.

Current PR

!gh pr view --json number,title,state,milestone -q '"PR #\(.number): \(.title) (\(.state)) | Milestone: \(.milestone.title // "none")"' 2>/dev/null

Core workflow

1. Fetch, filter, and classify comments

REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner')
PR=$(gh pr view --json number -q '.number')
LAST_PUSH=$(git log -1 --format=%cI HEAD)

# Inline review comments - filter out replies (keep only originals)
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR/comments?per_page=100 --jq '
  [.[] | select(.in_reply_to_id == null) |
   {id, path, user: .user.login, created_at, body: .body[0:200]}]
'

# PR-level reviews with non-empty body (CodeRabbit sections, Gemini, etc.)
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR/reviews?per_page=100 --jq '
  [.[] | select(.body | length > 0) |
   {id, user: .user.login, state, submitted_at, body: .body[0:500]}]
'

Cross-check review-attached comments: CodeRabbit's review body states "Actionable comments posted: N". If the general pulls/$PR/comments endpoint returns fewer than N new originals from that reviewer, some comments are only available via the review-specific endpoint. Fetch them and merge by comment ID:

# $REVIEW_ID from the reviews fetch above; $EXPECTED from parsing "Actionable comments posted: N"
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR/reviews/$REVIEW_ID/comments?per_page=100 --jq '
  [.[] | select(.in_reply_to_id == null) |
   {id, path, user: .user.login, created_at, body: .body[0:200]}]
'

Deduplicate by id before continuing. Comments found only via the review-specific endpoint are valid inline comments and should be treated identically (same classification, same in_reply_to reply mechanism).

Filter new vs already-seen: compare created_at/submitted_at with $LAST_PUSH. Comments posted after the last push are new. Mark older comments as "previous round" in the summary table.

Read the full file on GitHub · 217 lines

Files

What ships with it

2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

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. 1mo ago First seen · 217 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A 77cc65f1c2aa

Subscribe to this mod's changes

github-pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository fvadicamo/dev-agent-skills (72 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 95 tokens to every session and 2,836 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

test-audit

Audit test suites for T1-T4 violations using AST analysis, mock detection, and multi-stage synthesis. Invoke when user asks to audit tests, check test quality, find mock violations, review test effectiveness, or inspect test suites for over-mocking. Triggers automatic rewrites when quality gates fail.

QBall-Inc/the-bulwark · 0 tokens

code-review

Comprehensive code review with distinct aspect based sections. Use when reviewing code, checking for security issues, finding type safety problems, auditing code quality, or when user asks to review code, PRs or changes. Three-phase workflow runs static tools, LLM judgment, and writes diagnostic log.

QBall-Inc/the-bulwark · 61 tokens

spec-drift-check

Audits a WP brief for drift against current code — extracts claims, verifies each, emits PROCEED/STOP verdict. Use when starting a new WP, before consuming a spec as binding, or when a doc references paths/lines/functions.

QBall-Inc/the-bulwark · 54 tokens

second-opinion

Get second opinions on freshly written code from fresh Codex and Claude reviewers, one small batch at a time, then settle every finding against ground truth before accepting or vetoing it. Use when requested, when project instructions require review before commits, or as part of an active review workflow after tests…

photostructure/coding-skills · 64 tokens

resource-review

Top-level memory- and resource-safety code review for modern C/C++ (C++17), including Node.js native addons (node-addon-api / Node-API). Use when the user asks to "review C++/C for memory safety", "find a memory leak", "why does this segfault", "check for use-after-free / double-free / buffer overflow / data race"…

photostructure/coding-skills · 157 tokens

web-security-review

Top-level security code review for JavaScript/TypeScript web applications and Electron desktop applications. Use when the user asks to "security review", "find vulnerabilities", "check for security issues", "audit security", "OWASP review", "is this secure?", or to review…

photostructure/coding-skills · 172 tokens