coderabbit-intake

Files (1)

• SKILL.md

SKILL.md (first lines)

# CodeRabbit Intake

Minimal pipeline for CodeRabbit-created GitHub issues. These issues are already well-structured with clear context, file locations, and actionable tasks — no heavy research needed.

## When to Use

- User says "do coderabbit issues", "pick up a coderabbit ticket", "work on coderabbit issues"
- During issue-triage when `author.login === "app/coderabbitai"`
- Direct invocation with a coderabbit issue URL

## Configuration

```bash
# Target repository (checked in order):
# 1. $CR_TARGET_REPO env var (e.g., "Comfy-Org/ComfyUI_frontend")
# 2. Git remote origin if in a repo
# 3. Prompt user
```

## Workflow

### Step 1: Determine Target Repository

```bash
# Check env var first
if [ -n "$CR_TARGET_REPO" ]; then
  REPO="$CR_TARGET_REPO"
# Try git remote
elif git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null; then
  REPO=$(git remote get-url origin | sed 's/.*github.com[:/]\(.*\)\.git/\1/' | sed 's/.*github.com[:/]\(.*\)/\1/')
else
  # Prompt user
fi
```

### Step 2: Find Newest Unclaimed Issue

```bash
# Find newest open coderabbit issue without "in progress" label
# Note: --author flag doesn't work reliably for bot accounts, so filter with jq
gh issue list --repo "$REPO" \
  --state open \
  --json number,title,url,labels,createdAt,author \
  --limit 30 | jq '[.[] | select(.author.login == "app/coderabbitai") | select(.labels | map(.name) | index("in progress") | not)] | sort_by(.createdAt) | reverse | .[0]'
```

If no issues found:

```
✅ No unclaimed CodeRabbit issues in $REPO.
```

### Step 3: Fetch Issue Details

```bash
gh issue view $NUMBER --repo "$REPO" --json title,body,labels,url,createdAt
```

### Step 4: Assess Complexity

Parse the issue body and determine complexity:

**Complex indicators** (suggest full pipeline):

- 5+ files mentioned across different directories
- Keywords: "centralize", "audit", "throughout codebase", "refactor all", "create new system", "implement store", "add rollback"
- Vague scope without specific file references
- Multiple acceptance criteria
- New architecture/patterns required

**Simple indicators** (terminal branch OK):

- 1-3 specific files listed
- Keywords: "fix type", "rename", "update", "align with", "follow pattern", "localize", "replace"
- Clear single transformation (e.g., "replace X with Y")
- Single PR/comment reference with clear instruction

Score: Count complex vs simple signals.

### Step 5: Present Choice

```markdown
## CodeRabbit Issue Found

**Issue:** #$NUMBER - $TITLE
**Created:** $DATE
**URL:** $URL

### Complexity Assessment

$ASSESSMENT_REASONING

---

**Choose approach:**

**(a) Full Pipeline** — Use `ticket-intake` for research, planning, and structured implementation
→ Load: `ticket-intake` with issue URL

**(b) Terminal Branch** — Implement directly, quality-checks, PR
→ Continue below
```

Wait for user input.

### Step 6: Claim Issue (Terminal Branch)

If user chooses (b):

```bash
# Get current GitHub username
USERNAME=$(gh api user --jq '.login')

# Add "in progress" label
gh issue edit $NUMBER --repo "$REPO" --add-label "in progress"

# Assign to self
gh issue edit $NUMBER --repo "$REPO" --add-assignee "$USERNAME"
```

From DrJKL/ticket-to-pr-pipeline, MIT.

More from DrJKL/ticket-to-pr-pipeline