openshift-developer: add hooks, skills, and workflow documentation - #554
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 8 commits into
Conversation
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
approved
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Enterprise Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
WalkthroughThe PR adds two new skills ( ChangesFeature release: new review skills, precommit hooks, and registry updates
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
rect rgba(173, 216, 230, 0.5)
Note over Claude,GitHub API: address-review-pr workflow
end
participant Claude as Claude (address-review-pr)
participant GitHub API as GitHub API
participant repo as Local Git Repo
participant check_replied as check_replied.py
Claude->>GitHub API: Pass 1 — fetch comment/review metadata (IDs, authors, body lengths)
GitHub API-->>Claude: Raw comment list
Claude->>Claude: Filter bots, oversized bodies (>5000), orphaned items
Claude->>GitHub API: Pass 2 — fetch essential fields for kept items + PR commit messages
GitHub API-->>Claude: Filtered comment details
Claude->>Claude: Categorize into ACTION_INSTRUCTION/BLOCKING/CHANGE_REQUEST/QUESTION/SUGGESTION
Claude->>Claude: --preview: display proposed action per comment, await user confirmation
Claude->>repo: Rebase, apply code changes, run verification (15 min timeout, 3 retries)
Claude->>check_replied: Check for prior replies (exit code gating)
check_replied-->>Claude: No duplicates confirmed
Claude->>GitHub API: Post replies with attribution footer
Claude->>repo: git push (once)
Claude->>GitHub API: git ls-remote origin branch — verify pushed commit hash
Claude->>Claude: Emit final summary (counts + push confirmation)
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Important Pre-merge checks failedPlease resolve all errors before merging. Addressing warnings is optional. ❌ Failed checks (2 errors, 1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (7 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/README.md`:
- Line 26: The instruction on line 26 references "steps 4-5" but the Post-PR
workflow section (lines 21-24) only defines 2 steps. Update the text "Repeat
steps 4-5 until the PR is approved" to "Repeat steps 1-2 until the PR is
approved" to correctly reference the review cycle steps that were actually
defined in the Post-PR workflow section.
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.md`:
- Line 185: The SKILL.md file at line 185 documents the use of git push
--force-with-lease, which violates the coding guideline that prohibits all force
push operations including --force-with-lease variants. Replace the documented
command git push --force-with-lease with a safe push strategy such as standard
git push without the force flag, and ensure any accompanying documentation
explains the safer approach for pushing changes to the remote branch.
- Around line 171-191: The Step 4 workflow section (Post Replies and Push) does
not include an explicit user confirmation step before executing the git push
command in section 4b. According to the coding guideline, commands must never
push without explicit user permission. Add a new confirmation step between 4a
(Post all replies) and 4b (Push once) that asks the user to explicitly approve
the push action before proceeding with the git push --force-with-lease command.
This confirmation should be a required step in the main workflow, independent of
any --preview mode flag.
- Around line 171-191: In the Step 4b "Push once" section, add a pre-push
validation step before the git push command that retrieves the current branch
name and explicitly checks if it matches main or master variants. If the current
branch is a protected branch like main or master, exit with an error message and
non-zero exit code to prevent the push. This validation should occur immediately
before the git push --force-with-lease command to ensure no push operation
occurs to protected branches.
- Around line 128-132: The BASE_REMOTE discovery logic uses hardcoded
assumptions by grepping for specific remote names (upstream and origin) instead
of discovering them dynamically. Replace the grep-based approach that searches
for hardcoded remote names with a safe discovery method that uses git branch -vv
to extract the actual remote tracking the current branch, parsing the remote
name from the tracking information. If no tracking remote is found, fall back to
using git remote | head -1 to select the first available remote rather than
assuming a default name, ensuring the code discovers remotes first before making
assumptions about their names.
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-precommit/SKILL.md`:
- Line 49: The documentation contains the command git push --force-with-lease
which violates the force-push ban guideline. Locate the git push
--force-with-lease command in the SKILL.md file and replace it with a standard
git push command to comply with the coding guideline that rejects all force-push
variants.
- Around line 44-50: Step 4 in the SKILL.md file needs to add two safety checks
before executing the git push command: first, add a branch verification step
that checks if the current branch is main or master using git rev-parse and
prevents the push if it is, then add an explicit user confirmation prompt asking
the user to approve the push before executing the git push --force-with-lease
command. Update the step numbering accordingly and ensure both the branch
protection check and user confirmation are clearly documented in the markdown
instructions.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: b439e3ae-7170-4a75-9b46-e1ee3165d7bb
📒 Files selected for processing (14)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.json.skillsaw.yamldocs/index.htmlplugins/openshift-developer/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/openshift-developer/README.mdplugins/openshift-developer/hooks/hooks.jsonplugins/openshift-developer/scripts/ensure-precommit.shplugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.mdplugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/check_replied.pyplugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-precommit/SKILL.mdplugins/openshift-developer/skills/git-commit-format/SKILL.mdplugins/utils/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/utils/README.mdplugins/utils/commands/address-reviews.md
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
- plugins/utils/commands/address-reviews.md
- plugins/utils/README.md
| 1. `/code-review:pr` — Review an open PR for correctness and improvements. | ||
| 2. `/openshift-developer:address-review-pr` — Fetch reviewer comments, categorize by priority, make code changes, post replies, and push. | ||
|
|
||
| Repeat steps 4-5 until the PR is approved. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the step reference in the Post-PR workflow iteration instruction.
Line 26 references "steps 4-5", but the Post-PR workflow (lines 21–24) only defines 2 steps. This appears to be a stale or copy-pasted reference.
Based on the workflow, the repetition instruction should likely be "Repeat steps 1-2 until the PR is approved" (i.e., iterate the review cycle: code review → address comments → push).
🔧 Proposed fix
-Repeat steps 4-5 until the PR is approved.
+Repeat steps 1-2 until the PR is approved.📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| Repeat steps 4-5 until the PR is approved. | |
| Repeat steps 1-2 until the PR is approved. |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/README.md` at line 26, The instruction on line 26
references "steps 4-5" but the Post-PR workflow section (lines 21-24) only
defines 2 steps. Update the text "Repeat steps 4-5 until the PR is approved" to
"Repeat steps 1-2 until the PR is approved" to correctly reference the review
cycle steps that were actually defined in the Post-PR workflow section.
| BASE_REMOTE=$(git remote | grep -m1 '^upstream$') | ||
| if [ -z "$BASE_REMOTE" ]; then | ||
| BASE_REMOTE=$(git remote | grep -m1 '^origin$') | ||
| fi | ||
| BASE_REMOTE=${BASE_REMOTE:-origin} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use safe git commands to discover remotes instead of grepping hardcoded names.
Lines 128–132 attempt to discover the base remote by grepping for hardcoded names (upstream, then origin). The coding guideline requires: "Code should NEVER assume git remote names like 'origin' or 'upstream' without first discovering them — use git remote -v or git branch -vv to discover remotes first." While the current logic does fall back to a default, the initial grep assumes names without discovery.
🔍 Proposed fix: Use safe remote discovery
1. **Rebase**: Determine the base remote and branch first:
```bash
BASE_BRANCH=$(gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json baseRefName -q '.baseRefName')
- BASE_REMOTE=$(git remote | grep -m1 '^upstream$')
- if [ -z "$BASE_REMOTE" ]; then
- BASE_REMOTE=$(git remote | grep -m1 '^origin$')
- fi
- BASE_REMOTE=${BASE_REMOTE:-origin}
+ # Discover the actual remote tracking the base branch
+ BASE_REMOTE=$(git branch -vv | grep "^\* " | grep -oP '\[\K[^/]+' | head -1)
+ if [ -z "$BASE_REMOTE" ]; then
+ BASE_REMOTE=$(git remote | head -1)
+ fi
git fetch "$BASE_REMOTE" && git rebase "$BASE_REMOTE/$BASE_BRANCH"
```🧰 Tools
🪛 SkillSpector (2.1.1)
[error] 185: [TM1] Tool Parameter Abuse: Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).
Remediation: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
(Tool Misuse (TM1))
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.md` around lines
128 - 132, The BASE_REMOTE discovery logic uses hardcoded assumptions by
grepping for specific remote names (upstream and origin) instead of discovering
them dynamically. Replace the grep-based approach that searches for hardcoded
remote names with a safe discovery method that uses git branch -vv to extract
the actual remote tracking the current branch, parsing the remote name from the
tracking information. If no tracking remote is found, fall back to using git
remote | head -1 to select the first available remote rather than assuming a
default name, ensuring the code discovers remotes first before making
assumptions about their names.
Source: Coding guidelines
| ### Step 4: Post Replies and Push | ||
|
|
||
| #### 4a. Post all replies | ||
|
|
||
| - **Template**: `Done. [1-line what changed]. [Optional 1-line why]` | ||
| - Post reply: | ||
| ``` | ||
| gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/comments/<comment_id>/replies -f body="<reply>" | ||
| ``` | ||
| - **All replies must include**: `---\n*AI-assisted response via Claude Code*` | ||
|
|
||
| #### 4b. Push once | ||
|
|
||
| ```bash | ||
| git push --force-with-lease | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| #### 4c. Verify push | ||
|
|
||
| - Confirm `git log -1 --format='%H'` matches `git ls-remote origin <branch>` | ||
| - If push cannot be verified, report the failure — replies have already been posted |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clarify user permission flow for pushing — step 4 requires explicit re-confirmation.
Step 4 (Post Replies and Push) shows replies being posted and then a push, but the workflow does not explicitly re-confirm with the user before the actual push happens. The coding guideline requires: "Commands and skills must NEVER push without explicit user permission — always ask the user before pushing." The --preview mode exists (lines 112–119) but only applies when that flag is passed; the main workflow should also ask for final confirmation before pushing.
✅ Proposed clarification: Add explicit re-confirmation step before push
#### 4b. Push once
+Before pushing, ask the user: "Ready to push all changes? [y/N]"
+If user declines, skip the push and report what would have been pushed.
+
```bash
git push</details>
<details>
<summary>🧰 Tools</summary>
<details>
<summary>🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.22.1)</summary>
[warning] 177-177: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
</details>
<details>
<summary>🪛 SkillSpector (2.1.1)</summary>
[error] 185: [TM1] Tool Parameter Abuse: Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).
Remediation: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
(Tool Misuse (TM1))
</details>
</details>
<details>
<summary>🤖 Prompt for AI Agents</summary>
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In @plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.md around lines
171 - 191, The Step 4 workflow section (Post Replies and Push) does not include
an explicit user confirmation step before executing the git push command in
section 4b. According to the coding guideline, commands must never push without
explicit user permission. Add a new confirmation step between 4a (Post all
replies) and 4b (Push once) that asks the user to explicitly approve the push
action before proceeding with the git push --force-with-lease command. This
confirmation should be a required step in the main workflow, independent of any
--preview mode flag.
</details>
<!-- fingerprinting:phantom:triton:mongoose -->
<!-- cr-comment:v1:87870e1382f0c2d4c9b07404 -->
_Source: Coding guidelines_
---
_⚠️ Potential issue_ | _🟠 Major_ | _⚡ Quick win_
**Add explicit protection against pushing to main or master branches.**
The skill works on a PR branch (checked out at line 22), but the Step 4 push does not explicitly verify that the target branch is not a protected branch like `main` or `master`. The coding guideline states: "NEVER allow pushing to main or master branches — reject any `git push` command targeting main/master variants." Add a pre-push validation step.
<details>
<summary>🛡️ Proposed fix: Verify branch before push</summary>
```diff
#### 4b. Push once
+Verify the current branch is not a protected branch:
+```bash
+CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)
+if [[ "$CURRENT_BRANCH" =~ ^(main|master)$ ]]; then
+ echo "ERROR: Cannot push to protected branch '$CURRENT_BRANCH'" >&2
+ exit 1
+fi
+```
+
```bash
git push
</details>
<details>
<summary>🧰 Tools</summary>
<details>
<summary>🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.22.1)</summary>
[warning] 177-177: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
</details>
<details>
<summary>🪛 SkillSpector (2.1.1)</summary>
[error] 185: [TM1] Tool Parameter Abuse: Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).
Remediation: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
(Tool Misuse (TM1))
</details>
</details>
<details>
<summary>🤖 Prompt for AI Agents</summary>
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In @plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.md around lines
171 - 191, In the Step 4b "Push once" section, add a pre-push validation step
before the git push command that retrieves the current branch name and
explicitly checks if it matches main or master variants. If the current branch
is a protected branch like main or master, exit with an error message and
non-zero exit code to prevent the push. This validation should occur immediately
before the git push --force-with-lease command to ensure no push operation
occurs to protected branches.
</details>
<!-- fingerprinting:phantom:triton:mongoose -->
<!-- cr-comment:v1:91f5cc289b2c123ac571324c -->
_Source: Coding guidelines_
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by CodeRabbit -->
| ### Step 4: Commit and push | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Amend existing commits or create new commits as appropriate | ||
| 2. Push the branch to origin: | ||
| ```bash | ||
| git push --force-with-lease | ||
| ``` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add explicit re-confirmation before push and protect against pushing to main/master.
Step 4 lacks an explicit user permission prompt before pushing, and does not verify the current branch is not a protected branch (main/master). The coding guidelines require: (1) "always ask the user before pushing", and (2) "NEVER allow pushing to main or master branches."
✅ Proposed fix: Add confirmation and branch protection
### Step 4: Commit and push
1. Amend existing commits or create new commits as appropriate
+2. Verify the current branch is not a protected branch:
+ ```bash
+ CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)
+ if [[ "$CURRENT_BRANCH" =~ ^(main|master)$ ]]; then
+ echo "ERROR: Cannot push to protected branch '$CURRENT_BRANCH'" >&2
+ exit 1
+ fi
+ ```
-2. Push the branch to origin:
+3. Ask the user: "Ready to push fixes to origin? [y/N]"
+ If user declines, skip the push and report what was staged.
+4. Push the branch to origin:
```bash
git push
```📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| ### Step 4: Commit and push | |
| 1. Amend existing commits or create new commits as appropriate | |
| 2. Push the branch to origin: | |
| ```bash | |
| git push --force-with-lease | |
| ``` | |
| ### Step 4: Commit and push | |
| 1. Amend existing commits or create new commits as appropriate | |
| 2. Verify the current branch is not a protected branch: |
🧰 Tools
🪛 SkillSpector (2.1.1)
[error] 49: [TM1] Tool Parameter Abuse: Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).
Remediation: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
(Tool Misuse (TM1))
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-precommit/SKILL.md` around
lines 44 - 50, Step 4 in the SKILL.md file needs to add two safety checks before
executing the git push command: first, add a branch verification step that
checks if the current branch is main or master using git rev-parse and prevents
the push if it is, then add an explicit user confirmation prompt asking the user
to approve the push before executing the git push --force-with-lease command.
Update the step numbering accordingly and ensure both the branch protection
check and user confirmation are clearly documented in the markdown instructions.
Source: Coding guidelines
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How does this affect the periodic and the GHA we have now that runs this plugin?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The intent is to make this bundle the main way we distribute the executable dev workflows everywhere. They'll need to be updated
| 1. Amend existing commits or create new commits as appropriate | ||
| 2. Push the branch to origin: | ||
| ```bash | ||
| git push --force-with-lease |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 to coderabbit here, I try to keep my claude from ever force pushing, I can use tide's autosquash to squash things
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the original intent was for this skills to ammend commits where it make sense, hence the need to push force.
I can also see value on a workflow that always commit/push atop and let the commit/squash be a separate step. Dropped the --force flag. We can adjust and introduce other opinions as we iterate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not 100% sure these skills belong here, should this remain as a meta-module that pulls in others?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Me neither, I put it here initially instead of in the git plugin to avoid bringing many of those specs which are unneeded here as a dependency. This skill has a concrete use case and as a principle seems easier to iterate with less deps.
I moved it there and added the dependency with the git plugin. I would expect eventually we enforce distribution of a .gitlint file that runs on precommit hook
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
needs-rebase
On session start, installs both pre-commit and pre-push hooks via pre-commit if the repo has a .pre-commit-config.yaml. Fails if pre-commit is not installed. Every commit and push is then gated by the repo's hooks at zero ongoing token cost. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Move address-reviews from utils into openshift-developer as the address-review-pr skill. Fetches and addresses all PR review comments: categorizes by priority, makes code changes, posts replies, and pushes. Includes check_replied.py helper for duplicate reply prevention. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Fix code review findings before committing: applies fixes, runs verification, commits, and pushes. Designed to run after /code-review:pre-commit-review to close the pre-PR author loop. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Conventional commit formatting rules: types, scopes, breaking changes, required footers (Signed-off-by, Commit-Message-Assisted-by), and gitlint validation. Ported from openshift/hypershift and generalized for any OpenShift repo. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bump version to 1.3.0, document workflows (pre-PR and post-PR loops), prerequisites, and all new skills/hooks in README. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Validate .pre-commit-config.yaml against a trusted whitelist before installing hooks. Local hooks are always allowed. Remote repos must be explicitly trusted, and specific hooks can be restricted per repo. Trusted repos: - pre-commit/pre-commit-hooks (check-merge-conflict, check-yaml, trailing-whitespace only) - leaktk/gitleaks (all hooks) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
…view feedback - Move git-commit-format skill to plugins/git (keeps openshift-developer as a meta-module) - Add git plugin as a dependency - Remove --force-with-lease from address-review skills - Document all workflow skills in README ordered by workflow stage Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
38a431e to
1f39082
Compare
openshift-ci
Bot
removed
the
needs-rebase
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@plugins/openshift-developer/scripts/validate_precommit_config.py`:
- Around line 24-33: The code assumes yaml.safe_load returns a dict on line 33,
but it can return None for empty YAML files, causing an AttributeError when
calling cfg.get(). After the yaml.safe_load call that catches exceptions, add a
validation check to ensure cfg is a dict before proceeding to the
cfg.get("repos", []) call. If cfg is None or not a dict, return exit code 2 to
handle parse/shape errors consistently.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: c55c34b6-9de0-4b26-9bb9-dcbf6da69648
📒 Files selected for processing (16)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.json.skillsaw.yamldocs/index.htmlplugins/git/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/git/skills/git-commit-format/SKILL.mdplugins/openshift-developer/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/openshift-developer/README.mdplugins/openshift-developer/hooks/hooks.jsonplugins/openshift-developer/scripts/ensure-precommit.shplugins/openshift-developer/scripts/validate_precommit_config.pyplugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.mdplugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/check_replied.pyplugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-precommit/SKILL.mdplugins/utils/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/utils/README.mdplugins/utils/commands/address-reviews.md
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
- plugins/utils/README.md
- plugins/utils/commands/address-reviews.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (8)
- plugins/utils/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- plugins/openshift-developer/hooks/hooks.json
- .skillsaw.yaml
- plugins/git/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- plugins/git/skills/git-commit-format/SKILL.md
- plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-precommit/SKILL.md
- .claude-plugin/marketplace.json
- plugins/openshift-developer/README.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- plugins/openshift-developer/scripts/ensure-precommit.sh
- plugins/openshift-developer/skills/address-review-pr/SKILL.md
- plugins/openshift-developer/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- Narrow exception catch to OSError/YAMLError - Handle None/non-dict YAML shapes gracefully - Remove --force-with-lease from address-review skills Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: enxebre, stbenjam The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
3 participants
Summary
pre-commitwhen a repo has.pre-commit-config.yamladdress-review-prskill (moved fromutils:address-reviews) — fetches and addresses PR review comments by priorityaddress-review-precommitskill — fixes code review findings before committinggit-commit-formatskill — conventional commit formatting rules (ported from openshift/hypershift)Test plan
claude plugin install openshift-developer@ai-helpers/openshift-developer:address-review-pris available/openshift-developer:address-review-precommitis available/openshift-developer:git-commit-formatis available.pre-commit-config.yamlmake lintpasses🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit
git-commit-formatskill for Conventional Commit-style messages.utils:address-reviewscommand documentation.