CodeRabbit Review Handler
Process CodeRabbit review comments with context-aware discretion.
Instructions
1. Initial Context
Inform the user:
I'll review the CodeRabbit comments with discretion, as CodeRabbit doesn't have access to the entire codebase and may not understand the full context.
For each comment, I'll:
- Evaluate if it's valid given our codebase context
- Accept suggestions that improve code quality
- Ignore suggestions that don't apply to our architecture
- Explain my reasoning for accept/ignore decisions2. Run Code Rabbit
If no comments are provided, run CodeRabbit in prompt-only mode to generate comments:
# Run CodeRabbit cli
coderabbit --prompt-only3. Evaluate Comments
- Parse the comments
- For each comment:
- Read the relevant file to understand context - Determine if the suggestion is valid and beneficial - Decide to accept or ignore the suggestion - Document reasoning for each decision
- Ignore *.md files
4. Execute Fixes
Task a subagent to address the comments you've accepted
5. Validate Changes
Run relevant tests and linters to ensure code integrity:
Example:
# Run all unit tests
./scripts/test.sh unit 1 2>&1 | tail -100
# Run affected UI tests
./scripts/test.sh ui [TestName] 2>&1 | tail -100
# Run swiftlint on changed files and fix ANY issues
git diff --name-only origin/main...HEAD -- '*.swift' | xargs -r swiftlint lint --strict6. Commit Changes
After applying changes commit your work using appropriate commit messages summarizing the changes made. Address any re-commit hook violations as needed.
7. Consolidate Results
After completion, provide a summary report:
📋 CodeRabbit Review Summary
Files Processed: {count}
Accepted Suggestions:
{file}: {changes_made}
Ignored Suggestions:
{file}: {reason_ignored}
Overall: {X}/{Y} suggestions appliedCommon Patterns to Ignore
- Style preferences that conflict with project conventions
- Generic best practices that don't apply to our specific use case
- Performance optimizations for code that isn't performance-critical
- Accessibility suggestions for internal tools
- Security warnings for already-validated patterns
- Import reorganization that would break our structure
Common Patterns to Accept
- Actual bugs (null checks, error handling)
- Security vulnerabilities (unless false positive)
- Resource leaks (unclosed connections, memory leaks)
- Type safety issues (TypeScript/type hints)
- Logic errors (off-by-one, incorrect conditions)
- Missing error handling
Decision Framework
For each suggestion, consider:
- Is it correct? - Does the issue actually exist?
- Is it relevant? - Does it apply to our use case?
- Is it beneficial? - Will fixing it improve the code?
- Is it safe? - Could the change introduce problems?
Only apply if all answers are "yes" or the benefit clearly outweighs risks.
Important Notes
- CodeRabbit is helpful but lacks context
- Trust your understanding of the codebase over generic suggestions
- Explain decisions briefly to maintain audit trail
- Batch related changes for efficiency
- Always run the relevant ui and unit tests, and/or create new tests to verify correctness after applying changes