Automatically resolve human review comments on the current PR. Fetches unanswered human feedback, evaluates each comment, applies fixes where appropriate, and replies to every comment with the outcome.
Prerequisites
All commands below use npx agent-reviews. If the project uses a different package manager, substitute the appropriate runner (e.g., pnpm dlx agent-reviews for pnpm, yarn dlx agent-reviews for Yarn, bunx agent-reviews for Bun). Honor the user's package manager preference throughout.
Cloud environments only (e.g., Codespaces, remote agents): verify git author identity so CI checks can map commits to the user. Run git config --global --get user.email and if empty or a placeholder, set it manually. Skip this check in local environments.
Phase 1: FETCH & FIX (synchronous)
Step 1: Fetch All Human Comments (Expanded)
Run npx agent-reviews --humans-only --unanswered --expanded
The CLI auto-detects the current branch, finds the associated PR, and authenticates via gh CLI or environment variables. If anything fails (no token, no PR, CLI not installed), it exits with a clear error message.
This shows only unanswered human comments with full detail: complete comment body (no truncation), diff hunk (code context), and all replies. Each comment shows its ID in brackets (e.g., [12345678]).
If zero comments are returned, print "No unanswered human comments found" and skip to Phase 2.
Step 3: Process Each Unanswered Comment
For each comment from the expanded output:
A. Evaluate the Feedback
Read the referenced code and the reviewer's comment. Human reviewers are generally more accurate and context-aware than bots. Treat their feedback with appropriate weight. Determine:
- ACTIONABLE - The reviewer identified a real issue or requested a concrete change
- DISCUSSION - The comment raises a valid point but the right approach is unclear
- ALREADY ADDRESSED - The concern has already been fixed or is no longer relevant
Likely ACTIONABLE:
- Reviewer points out a bug or logic error
- Reviewer requests a specific code change
- Reviewer identifies missing edge cases or error handling
- Reviewer flags a naming, API, or architectural concern with a clear fix
- Reviewer suggests a better approach with justification
Likely DISCUSSION -- ask the user:
- Reviewer suggests an architectural change you're unsure about
- Comment involves a tradeoff (performance vs readability, etc.)
- Reviewer's suggestion conflicts with patterns used elsewhere in the codebase
- The feedback is subjective (style, naming preferences) without team consensus
- You disagree with the feedback and want the author to weigh in
Likely ALREADY ADDRESSED:
- The code has been changed since the review was posted
- Another commit already fixed the issue
- The comment refers to code that no longer exists
B. Act on Evaluation
If ACTIONABLE: Fix the code. Track the comment ID and a brief description of the fix.
If DISCUSSION: Ask the user to consult the PR author. Apply their decision and track it.
If ALREADY ADDRESSED: Track the comment ID and note why.
Do NOT reply to comments yet. Replies happen after the commit (Step 5).
Step 4: Commit and Push
After evaluating and fixing ALL unanswered comments:
- Run your project's lint and type-check
- Stage, commit, and push:
git add -A git commit -m "fix: address PR review feedback {List of changes made, grouped by reviewer}" git push - Capture the commit hash from the output.
Step 5: Reply to All Comments
Now that the commit hash exists, reply to every processed comment. The --resolve flag marks the review thread as resolved on GitHub.
For each ACTIONABLE:
Run npx agent-reviews --reply <comment_id> "Fixed in {hash}. {Brief description of the fix}" --resolve
For each DISCUSSION (after user decision):
Run npx agent-reviews --reply <comment_id> "{Outcome}. {Explanation of the decision and any changes made}" --resolve
For each ALREADY ADDRESSED:
Run npx agent-reviews --reply <comment_id> "Already addressed. {Explanation of when/how this was fixed}" --resolve
DO NOT start Phase 2 until all replies are posted.
Phase 2: POLL FOR FOLLOW-UP COMMENTS (loop until quiet)
The watcher exits immediately when new comments are found (after a 5s grace period to catch batch posts). This means you run it in a loop: start watcher, process any comments it returns, restart watcher, repeat until the watcher times out with no new comments.
Step 6: Start Watcher Loop
Repeat the following until the watcher exits with no new comments:
6a. Launch the watcher in the background:
Run npx agent-reviews --watch --humans-only as a background task.
6b. Wait for the background command to complete (default 10 minutes; override with --timeout).
6c. Check the output:
- If new comments were found (output contains
EXITING WITH NEW COMMENTS):
1. Use --detail <id> to read each new comment's full detail 2. Process them exactly as in Phase 1, Steps 3-5 (evaluate, fix, commit, push, reply) 3. Go back to Step 6a to restart the watcher
- If no new comments (output contains
WATCH COMPLETE): Stop looping and move to the Summary Report.
Summary Report
After both phases complete, provide a summary:
## PR Review Resolution Summary
### Results
- Fixed: X issues
- Already addressed: X
- Discussion resolved: X
- Skipped per user: X
### By Reviewer
#### @reviewer-name
- {description} - Fixed in {commit}
- {description} - Already addressed
### Status
All review comments addressed. Watch completed.Important Notes
Response Policy
- Every comment gets a response - No silent ignores
- Replies keep reviewers informed and unblock approvals
- Even "already addressed" comments deserve acknowledgement
User Interaction
- Ask the user when the right approach is unclear
- Human reviewers often have context you don't - defer to the author when unsure
- It's better to ask than to make a change the author wouldn't approve
Best Practices
- Human reviewers are generally more accurate than bots - default to trusting their feedback
- Keep fixes minimal and focused - don't refactor unrelated code
- Ensure type-check and lint pass before committing
- Group related fixes into a single commit
- If a reviewer suggests a specific code change, prefer their version unless it introduces issues