feat: use GitHub suggestion syntax in PR reviewer comments#47508
Merged
pelikhan merged 2 commits intoJul 23, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot
AI
changed the title
feat: use suggestion syntax in PR reviewer review comments
feat: use GitHub suggestion syntax in PR reviewer comments
Jul 23, 2026
Copilot created this pull request from a session on behalf of
pelikhan
July 23, 2026 07:03
View session
Contributor
🤖 PR Triage
Score Breakdown: Impact 15 · Urgency 10 · Quality 10 DRAFT PR updating reviewer workflows to use GitHub suggestion syntax. Low-urgency improvement — no CI data available. Defer until author marks ready for review.
|
Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
Author
Done — |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Updates PR reviewer workflows to generate one-click GitHub code suggestions.
Changes:
- Adds
suggestion-block guidance and examples. - Retains
<details>as a fallback for structural fixes. - Refreshes generated workflow metadata.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
.github/workflows/pr-code-quality-reviewer.md |
Updates review-comment instructions. |
.github/workflows/pr-code-quality-reviewer.lock.yml |
Refreshes generated metadata. |
.github/workflows/mattpocock-skills-reviewer.md |
Adds suggestion guidance and examples. |
.github/workflows/mattpocock-skills-reviewer.lock.yml |
Refreshes generated metadata. |
Review details
Tip
Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)
.github/workflows/pr-code-quality-reviewer.md:140
- This preference conflicts with the existing Review Formatting rule at line 193, which still requires every code suggestion to be wrapped in
<details>. With both instructions present, the reviewer may continue producing the old non-applicable format. Update that rule to exempt direct GitHub suggestions.
- **GitHub suggestion** (preferred when the fix maps to the commented lines): use a ` ```suggestion ` block so the author can apply it with one click
.github/workflows/mattpocock-skills-reviewer.md:208
start_lineis based on how many existing diff lines are being replaced, not how many lines appear in the replacement text. The current wording teaches incorrect range construction and conflicts with the safe-output contract wherelineis the ending line (actions/setup/js/safe_outputs_tools.json:419-435).
- Use a `` ```suggestion `` block (preferred) when the fix is a concrete replacement for the commented lines; set `start_line` when spanning multiple lines
- Files reviewed: 4/4 changed files
- Comments generated: 2
- Review effort level: Medium
| <summary>💡 Suggested fix</summary> | ||
| For each significant issue, call `create-pull-request-review-comment` (safe output) with: | ||
| - `path` — repository-relative file path | ||
| - `line` — line number in the diff (use `start_line` when the replacement spans multiple lines) |
| "path": "path/to/file.ts", | ||
| "line": 42, | ||
| "body": "**[/tdd]** Missing edge case: `value` is `null` — add a test to prevent this regression.\n\n<details>\n<summary>💡 Suggested test</summary>\n\n```ts\nit('returns default when value is null', () => {\n expect(fn(null)).toBe(defaultValue);\n});\n```\n\nMissing edge case tests are a common source of regressions.\n\n</details>\n\n@copilot please address this." | ||
| "body": "**[/tdd]** Missing edge case: `value` is `null` — add a test to prevent this regression.\n\n```suggestion\nit('returns default when value is null', () => {\n expect(fn(null)).toBe(defaultValue);\n});\n```\n\nMissing edge case tests are a common source of regressions.\n\n@copilot please address this." |
Contributor
|
🎉 This pull request is included in a new release. Release: |
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
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.
PR reviewer workflows embed code fixes in collapsed
<details>blocks, requiring authors to read and manually apply changes. Switching to GitHub'ssuggestionsyntax makes fixes one-click applicable directly from the review UI.Changes
pr-code-quality-reviewer.md— Step 4 updated: prefer```suggestionblocks for concrete line-level fixes;start_lineguidance added for multi-line spans;<details>retained as fallback for issues requiring broader structural changesmattpocock-skills-reviewer.md— Step 5 updated with the same pattern; two concrete JSON examples (with and without suggestion) replace the single<details>-only exampleExample
Review comment body with a one-click suggestion: