cf86a91e4a
- Remove all .github references (removed in 6c644dd but docs still referenced)
- Rewrite review-pr skill to use Gitea API instead of gh CLI
- Add gitea-pr.sh helper for Gitea API calls (view/diff/files/comments)
- Update project structure tree: add scripts/, .woodpecker.yml, ci-cd.md,
status-update-checklist.md, commit-docs-reminder.sh, RESEARCH-SDD-TOOLS.md
- Fix skills count 14 → 15 (add create-skill to DOCS.md)
- Remove .github references from CONTRIBUTING.md, SECURITY.md, init-project
- Add GITEA_TOKEN to .env.example
- Update CI/CD placeholder in RECOMMENDATIONS.md to Woodpecker
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
1.6 KiB
1.6 KiB
name, description, disable-model-invocation, argument-hint, context, agent, allowed-tools
| name | description | disable-model-invocation | argument-hint | context | agent | allowed-tools |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| review-pr | Review a specific Gitea pull request by number — fetches PR diff and comments via Gitea API, then provides structured review. | true | [pr-number] | fork | code-reviewer | Bash(bash:*,curl:*,git:*), Read, Grep, Glob |
Review Pull Request
Review PR #$ARGUMENTS.
Context
PR details (JSON):
!bash .claude/skills/review-pr/gitea-pr.sh $ARGUMENTS view
PR diff:
!bash .claude/skills/review-pr/gitea-pr.sh $ARGUMENTS diff
Changed files (JSON):
!bash .claude/skills/review-pr/gitea-pr.sh $ARGUMENTS files
PR comments (JSON):
!bash .claude/skills/review-pr/gitea-pr.sh $ARGUMENTS comments
Steps
-
Understand the PR — read title, description, and comments for context
-
Analyze all changed files — not just the latest commit, ALL changes in the PR
-
Read relevant source files for full context (not just the diff)
-
Verify dependencies — check new packages for CVEs via context7
-
Check against project rules — read
RULES.md -
Review in priority order: Security > Reliability > Performance > Maintainability > Testing
-
Report:
# PR Review: #[number] — [title]
## Summary
[What this PR does, overall assessment]
**Verdict**: APPROVE / APPROVE WITH COMMENTS / REQUEST CHANGES
## Critical Issues
[Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks — with fixes]
## High Priority
[Significant issues — with fixes]
## Medium Priority
[Improvements — grouped]
## What's Done Well
- [Specific praise]
## Recommendations
1. [Prioritized next steps]