chore(skills): teach babysit about cubic, not just Greptile - #7372
Merged
Conversation
The loop only re-triggered `@greptile` after a push. Two bots review this repo, so a round would end with Greptile at 5/5 and cubic's threads still open against an earlier commit, their findings never re-checked against the fix. Adds what distinguishes them: cubic has no score and reports only inline threads, posts a fresh review per run rather than editing one comment in place, answers to `@cubic-dev-ai review this PR` rather than `@cubic`, and reviews the commit that was HEAD when its run started — so a stale thread is a reply-and-resolve, not a fix. Both are now re-triggered as separate comments and confirmed `pending` before the loop waits, since a trigger that silently failed is indistinguishable from a reviewer that has not started. Also promotes CI to a stop condition. A red required check is not clean no matter what either reviewer says, and the lint and audit jobs routinely catch what a local run does not. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
Contributor
Greptile SummaryThe babysit skill now coordinates Greptile and cubic review rounds and requires all CI checks to finish successfully before declaring a PR clean.
Confidence Score: 5/5The PR appears safe to merge. No blocking failure remains.
|
| Filename | Overview |
|---|---|
| .agents/skills/babysit/SKILL.md | Documents the two-reviewer loop and fully addresses the previously reported pending-check and thread-author issues. |
Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "chore(skills): treat a pending check as ..." | Re-trigger Greptile
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Two defects in the round this adds, both caught in review. The stop condition tested only for a failing check, so a check still running when both reviewers finished counted as clean and the loop reported the PR ready before CI had its say. It now requires every check to have finished and passed, and sends a pending one back to the wait step. The thread-attribution note pointed at `author.login` per thread, but `PullRequestReviewThread` has no author field — GitHub rejects the query with `Field 'author' doesn't exist on type 'PullRequestReviewThread'`. Identity lives on the comments, so it now names the real path and says not to lift the field to the thread level. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Collaborator
Author
Collaborator
Author
|
@cubic-dev-ai review this PR |
Contributor
@icecrasher321 I have started the AI code review. It will take a few minutes to complete. |
![cubic-dev-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1082092?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No issues found across 1 file
Confidence score: 5/5
- Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
- No files require special attention.
Heads up: you’re close to your included review allowance. Set a flex budget so reviews don’t pause.
Re-trigger cubic
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The babysit loop only re-triggered
@greptileafter a push. Two bots review this repo, so a round would end with Greptile at 5/5 and cubic's threads still open against an earlier commit — its findings never re-checked against the fix. Hit this live on #7370.What the skill now knows
greptile-apps)cubic-dev-ai)Confidence Score: X/5@greptile@cubic-dev-ai review this PRFour things that were easy to get wrong:
@cubicdoes not work. The documented wording is@cubic-dev-ai review this PR.gh pr checksmust show both aspending; one still showingpassfrom the previous round means its trigger never landed. A failed trigger is otherwise indistinguishable from a reviewer that hasn't started.CI is now a stop condition
"Clean" was two conditions (Greptile 5/5, zero open threads) and is now three, adding: no failing required check. A red check is not clean regardless of what either reviewer says, and the lint/audit jobs routinely catch what a local run misses — on #7370 they caught a hand-written
instanceof Errorternary and stale generated metadata that every local check passed over.Docs-only change to
.agents/skills/babysit/SKILL.md;sync-skills.tsreports all 40 skills in sync.🤖 Generated with Claude Code