/github-review

Make it your own.

In Claude Code, use the slash command and add your context. In Codex, select github-review from the just-vibe skill picker, then send the same brief.

Version 0.11.0 also supports /jv github-review, /just-vibe github-review and /jv:github-review in Claude. See shortcut setup and context examples.

What the agent does

1. Record the head and base SHA and fetch that diff; read changed and surrounding source and relevant discussion.
2. Map each finding to a current diff location and verify it against the current head, distinguishing blockers from optional observations.
3. Revalidate the head before any requested posting.
4. All changes are owned by the user. Add no agent/model self-attribution, AI-generated signature, badge, or agent Co-authored-by trailer to commits, PRs, comments, release notes or messages. Use the existing user Git identity; preserve legitimate human attribution and required third-party notices.

Inputs

• PR URL/number, revision, and review focus.

Optional context: scope, references, constraints, successCriteria, environment, mode, budget.

Scope

Reads

Code review informed by discussion and checks; no automatic review submission.

Writes

Inspect/plan: review without posting; save requested artifacts only. Apply: post only the requested review or comments to the resolved PR after revalidating its head revision. Approving, merging, resolving threads and pushing need their own exact request.

Mode

Inspect; PR URL/number, revision, and review focus. Posting a requested review uses apply mode.

Prerequisites

Exact owner/repository and relevant issue/PR/ref; authenticated read access through an available connector or CLI for remote evidence. External writes require the requested operation, appropriate account permissions, and rechecking target state. Local preparation remains useful without write access.

Expected output

• Prioritized findings with trigger, evidence and current diff locations, the reviewed SHA and review limitations.

How the work is checked

• A finding fixed in the latest revision is not repeated; review comments use locations that exist in the reviewed diff.
• Review newly prepared commit/PR/message text, including template or hook additions, for agent self-attribution before submission; verify the resulting artifact when available. Do not silently rewrite existing history or remove human credits.

When to stop or clarify

• Sending a review requires explicit instruction. Recheck head before posting so findings are not silently attached to stale code.

Handling missing context

Infer

Resolve owner/repository and PR/issue/ref from links, remotes and supplied artifacts; inspect available account and head identity.

Assume

Prepare local text or analyze supplied evidence if remote access is absent; label its freshness.

Ask

Ask only when repository/account/target ambiguity blocks the requested remote action; missing write access does not block local drafting.

Technical guidance

Evidence

Obtain the exact PR head diff, full changed files, callers, checks and relevant prior discussion.

Method

Apply the review selection guide to changed boundaries; require a concrete trigger, reachable bad outcome and verified absence of an upstream guard.

Pitfall

Fixed line numbers or findings from an older head can become wrong after force-push; unchanged critical risks need explicit attribution.

Check

Reconfirm head and diff location before any authorized posting; report severity from impact and confidence separately.

Situational decisions

When the PR head changes during inspection: Refresh affected findings and checks rather than attaching stale comments.

The coding agent follows this workflow using its available tools. Installation does not grant service access or guarantee an outcome. Read the compatibility notes.

Keep exploring