[review.agent] Wrap review summary and inline comments in collapsible <details> blocks

[kubaflo]

Note

Are you waiting for the changes in this PR to be merged?
It would be very helpful if you could test the resulting artifacts from this PR and let us know in a comment if this change resolves your issue. Thank you!

Summary

Wraps the Expert Code Review workflow's output (review summary body + every inline comment body) in collapsible <details> blocks so reviewers see a one-line header in the timeline by default and only expand what's relevant. Reduces noise on PRs with many MINOR findings without filtering any content — everything is one click away.

This addresses the readability problem visible on PRs like #33007, where 4 inline comments + a long summary scroll past every conversation-tab visit.

What changed

.github/workflows/shared/review-shared.md Step 4 — orchestrator instructions now require:

Review summary body (submit_pull_request_review):

## 🤖 Expert Code Review

<details>
<summary>{verdictDot} <strong>{verdictLabel}</strong> — <a href="https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/commit/{commitFull}"><code>{commitSha7}</code></a> · <strong>{prTitle}</strong></summary>

[full body]

</details>

• {verdictDot} / {verdictLabel}: 🟢 LGTM | 🟡 Changes Suggested | 🔴 Changes Required | 🟠 Discussion Needed
• <details open> for 🔴/🟡 (so findings are visible without a click); <details> (closed) for 🟢
• No timestamp, no finding-count tally — just verdict + commit + PR title

Inline comments (each create_pull_request_review_comment):

<details>
<summary>{severityDot} <strong>{severityLabel}</strong> — {one-line headline} ({N}/3 reviewers)</summary>

[full body]

</details>

Always closed by default — the headline carries enough info to decide whether to expand.

Preview

A live preview is posted on closed PR #35190 — see review #4196553207. The two inline comments under it have additionally been minimized via GraphQL minimizeComment(classifier: OUTDATED) to demonstrate the optional "Show minimized comment" UX in the Files Changed tab (not part of this PR — would require a follow-up post-step in the workflow).

Notes

• This is a prompt-body change in review-shared.md (after the frontmatter ---). Per gh-aw, only frontmatter changes affect the lock-file hash, so no gh aw compile is required.
• No frontmatter, no safe-outputs, no permissions changed.
• No code changes — only orchestration-prompt text the agent follows when posting reviews.

How to test

1. Trigger the workflow against an existing open PR that has multiple findings:

   gh workflow run review.agent.yml -R dotnet/maui -f pr_number=<PR_NUMBER> --ref copilot/collapsible-review-comments

   (Or comment /review on the PR after enabling slash-command from this branch.)
2. Watch the run at https://github.com/dotnet/maui/actions/workflows/review.agent.lock.yml
3. Open the PR and verify:
   • Conversation tab shows ## 🤖 Expert Code Review heading + a single collapsed <details> line with verdict, commit short SHA, and PR title.
   • Files Changed tab shows each inline comment as a collapsed <details> thread.
   • 🔴/🟡 reviews open by default; 🟢 LGTM stays closed.

A safe target is a small recently-merged PR — re-running on a closed PR is fine and produces a comparable preview comment without affecting open work.

[github-actions]

🚀 Dogfood this PR with:

⚠️ WARNING: Do not do this without first carefully reviewing the code of this PR to satisfy yourself it is safe.

curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dotnet/maui/main/eng/scripts/get-maui-pr.sh | bash -s -- 35226

Or

• Run remotely in PowerShell:

iex "& { $(irm https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dotnet/maui/main/eng/scripts/get-maui-pr.ps1) } 35226"

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Updates the Expert Code Review shared workflow instructions to format both the top-level review body and each inline review comment using collapsible <details> blocks, reducing timeline noise while keeping all content available on demand.

Changes:

• Adds required <details>/<summary> templates for the submit_pull_request_review summary body.
• Adds required <details>/<summary> templates for each create_pull_request_review_comment inline comment body.
• Introduces verdict/severity “header line” conventions (emoji + label + metadata) for quick scanning.

[Copilot]

The instructions say the review summary body “must follow this exact structure”, but the next bullets require switching between <details> and <details open> based on the verdict. Consider rewording to explicitly allow that single conditional variation (e.g., “exact structure, with <details> open/closed depending on verdict”) so the orchestrator doesn’t treat <details open> as violating the required template.

[Copilot]

The “open by default” guidance only covers 🔴 and 🟡 verdicts, but the template also defines 🟠 “Discussion Needed”. That case is currently unspecified and may end up closed by default; consider stating whether 🟠 should also use <details open> (likely) to avoid hiding important architectural/discussion notes.

Suggested change

	- Use `<details open>` (open by default) when the verdict is 🔴 or 🟡 so reviewers see findings without an extra click. Use `<details>` (closed) for 🟢 LGTM.
	- Use `<details open>` (open by default) when the verdict is 🔴, 🟡, or 🟠 so reviewers see findings or architectural discussion without an extra click. Use `<details>` (closed) for 🟢 LGTM.

[Copilot]

Inline comment summaries hardcode "({N}/3 reviewers)", but Step 2 explicitly allows a 2-reviewer fallback when only 2 sub-agents complete successfully. In that scenario the inline header would be inaccurate; consider making this "({N}/{totalReviewers} reviewers)" or omitting the denominator when fewer than 3 reviewers contributed.