@olegkoval/agent-skills 1.24.0 → 1.26.0

package/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "name": "olko-agent-skills",
   "description": "Agent-agnostic skill catalog for Codex, Claude, Cursor, Grok, Copilot, Windsurf, Kiro, and other skill-aware tools.",
-  "version": "1.23.0",
+  "version": "1.25.0",
   "author": {
     "name": "Oleg Koval"
   },
@@ -32,14 +32,21 @@
     "./packages/software-development/macos-menubar-app",
     "./packages/software-development/skill-budget-audit",
     "./packages/software-development/crash-course",
+    "./packages/software-development/pr-finalize",
+    "./packages/software-development/pr-finalize-complete",
     "./packages/software-development/qodoloop",
     "./packages/wearables/garmin-watchface",
     "./packages/software-development/coderabbitloop",
+    "./packages/software-development/codexloop",
+    "./packages/software-development/geminiloop",
     "./packages/software-development/add-to-my-skills",
     "./packages/software-development/ai-tools-setup",
     "./packages/software-development/changelog-generator",
     "./packages/software-development/wikipedia-uk-editor",
     "./packages/software-development/pr-description-writer",
-    "./packages/software-development/ci-fix-loop"
+    "./packages/software-development/ci-fix-loop",
+    "./packages/software-development/pr-to-green",
+    "./packages/software-development/dependabot-triage",
+    "./packages/software-development/store-listing-copy"
   ]
 }

package/.cursor-plugin/index.json

@@ -106,6 +106,16 @@
       "source": "./packages/software-development/crash-course/adapters/cursor",
       "description": "Expert tutor for rapid, source-grounded learning of any topic: a timed 4-hour sprint plus cheat-sheet, learning-ladder, quiz-me, Feynman, and resource-curation modes."
     },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:pr-finalize",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/pr-finalize/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Drives one GitHub PR to genuinely merge-ready: rebases and resolves conflicts, sweeps every review bot and human comment to zero unaddressed findings, verifies unit and E2E coverage actually exists, runs the repo's real lint/format/test gates before pushing, and reports what still needs a human."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:pr-finalize-complete",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/pr-finalize-complete/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Confirms a PR is genuinely merge-ready when the work is already believed done: re-checks every review-bot and human finding against the current code, separates stale comments from fixed ones, runs the repo's real lint and test gates, and reports the evidence rather than the assumption."
+    },
     {
       "name": "olko:qodoloop",
       "source": "./packages/software-development/qodoloop/adapters/cursor",
@@ -121,6 +131,16 @@
       "source": "./packages/software-development/coderabbitloop/adapters/cursor",
       "description": "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved CodeRabbit findings — reads each inline comment's own Prompt for AI Agents block, applies the fix, replies to the thread, resolves it, pushes, and re-triggers CodeRabbit."
     },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:codexloop",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/codexloop/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved OpenAI Codex review comments — but verifies every finding against the real code first, fixes only the correct ones, and rebuts false positives without changing correct code."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:geminiloop",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/geminiloop/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved Gemini Code Assist comments — treats each one as a claim to verify, fixes only the genuinely-correct findings, and rebuts the rest with evidence instead of editing correct code."
+    },
     {
       "name": "olko:add-to-my-skills",
       "source": "./packages/software-development/add-to-my-skills/adapters/cursor",
@@ -150,6 +170,21 @@
       "name": "olko:ci-fix-loop",
       "source": "./packages/software-development/ci-fix-loop/adapters/cursor",
       "description": "Diagnose GitHub Actions CI failures in a loop: fetch failing check logs, fix, push, and repeat until green. Direct analog of qodoloop / coderabbitloop for test and lint failures."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:pr-to-green",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/pr-to-green/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Orchestrate a GitHub PR from first push to merge-ready: run ci-fix-loop until checks are green, detect active AI review bots, run qodoloop and coderabbitloop in sequence, and confirm zero unresolved threads."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:dependabot-triage",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/dependabot-triage/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Triage open Dependabot and Renovate PRs in bulk: classify by risk tier, auto-approve and merge safe patch bumps, flag breaking major upgrades for human review, and post a digest."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:store-listing-copy",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/store-listing-copy/adapters/cursor",
+      "description": "Generate platform-validated App Store, Google Play, and Connect IQ store listing copy (title, subtitle, description, what's new, keywords) from a git changelog or release notes."
     }
   ]
 }

package/.grok-plugin/index.json

@@ -116,6 +116,16 @@
       "source": "./packages/software-development/crash-course/adapters/grok",
       "description": "Expert tutor for rapid, source-grounded learning of any topic: a timed 4-hour sprint plus cheat-sheet, learning-ladder, quiz-me, Feynman, and resource-curation modes."
     },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:pr-finalize",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/pr-finalize/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Drives one GitHub PR to genuinely merge-ready: rebases and resolves conflicts, sweeps every review bot and human comment to zero unaddressed findings, verifies unit and E2E coverage actually exists, runs the repo's real lint/format/test gates before pushing, and reports what still needs a human."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:pr-finalize-complete",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/pr-finalize-complete/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Confirms a PR is genuinely merge-ready when the work is already believed done: re-checks every review-bot and human finding against the current code, separates stale comments from fixed ones, runs the repo's real lint and test gates, and reports the evidence rather than the assumption."
+    },
     {
       "name": "olko:qodoloop",
       "source": "./packages/software-development/qodoloop/adapters/grok",
@@ -131,6 +141,16 @@
       "source": "./packages/software-development/coderabbitloop/adapters/grok",
       "description": "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved CodeRabbit findings — reads each inline comment's own Prompt for AI Agents block, applies the fix, replies to the thread, resolves it, pushes, and re-triggers CodeRabbit."
     },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:codexloop",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/codexloop/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved OpenAI Codex review comments — but verifies every finding against the real code first, fixes only the correct ones, and rebuts false positives without changing correct code."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:geminiloop",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/geminiloop/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved Gemini Code Assist comments — treats each one as a claim to verify, fixes only the genuinely-correct findings, and rebuts the rest with evidence instead of editing correct code."
+    },
     {
       "name": "olko:add-to-my-skills",
       "source": "./packages/software-development/add-to-my-skills/adapters/grok",
@@ -160,6 +180,21 @@
       "name": "olko:ci-fix-loop",
       "source": "./packages/software-development/ci-fix-loop/adapters/grok",
       "description": "Diagnose GitHub Actions CI failures in a loop: fetch failing check logs, fix, push, and repeat until green. Direct analog of qodoloop / coderabbitloop for test and lint failures."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:pr-to-green",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/pr-to-green/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Orchestrate a GitHub PR from first push to merge-ready: run ci-fix-loop until checks are green, detect active AI review bots, run qodoloop and coderabbitloop in sequence, and confirm zero unresolved threads."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:dependabot-triage",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/dependabot-triage/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Triage open Dependabot and Renovate PRs in bulk: classify by risk tier, auto-approve and merge safe patch bumps, flag breaking major upgrades for human review, and post a digest."
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "olko:store-listing-copy",
+      "source": "./packages/software-development/store-listing-copy/adapters/grok",
+      "description": "Generate platform-validated App Store, Google Play, and Connect IQ store listing copy (title, subtitle, description, what's new, keywords) from a git changelog or release notes."
     }
   ]
 }

package/.kiro/steering/codexloop.md

@@ -0,0 +1,254 @@
+<!-- Generated by scripts/build-adapters.sh. Do not edit directly. -->
+
+---
+inclusion: manual
+description: "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved OpenAI Codex review comments — but verifies every finding against the real code first, fixes only the correct ones, and rebuts false positives without changing correct code."
+---
+
+# Codexloop
+
+Drive a GitHub PR until Codex has no unresolved review comments — **but do not cargo-cult its
+suggestions.** Every comment is a *claim to verify*, not an instruction to obey. A wrong
+suggestion applied is worse than the comment itself.
+
+## How Codex differs from Greptile / Gemini
+
+- **No check-run, no score.** Codex does not publish an `X/5` confidence or a named check. It posts
+  a **PR review** (state `COMMENTED`) plus inline review comments. Detection is by polling the
+  *reviews* endpoint. "Satisfied" = zero unresolved comments (each either fixed or rebutted).
+- **Trigger phrase is `@codex review`.** Codex reviews automatically when a PR opens or gets new
+  commits if auto-review is enabled on the repo; the mention forces a fresh pass. Other useful
+  mentions: `@codex review focus on <area>` for a scoped re-review.
+- **Priority, not confidence.** Codex findings usually lead with a severity/priority word (`P1`,
+  `P2`, `P3` or `critical`/`major`/`minor`) or a short titled heading. Weight the top tier
+  seriously; treat the bottom tier as usually-skippable nits unless clearly correct.
+- **Codex is terse and often reasons from the diff alone.** Its characteristic failure is
+  confidently asserting a bug based only on the changed hunk, without the surrounding file or the
+  call sites. That makes "read the whole file before believing it" the single highest-value check.
+
+## Not for
+
+- GitLab / Perforce (Codex code review is a GitHub app). For other review bots this catalog ships
+  `geminiloop`, `coderabbitloop`, and `qodoloop`; for CI failures rather than review comments, use
+  `ci-fix-loop`.
+
+## 0. Resolve the Codex bot login (do this first, do not hardcode)
+
+The connector's bot login varies by installation, so discover it from the PR rather than
+assuming it:
+
+```bash
+gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/reviews --paginate --jq '.[].user.login' | sort -u
+gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/comments --paginate --jq '.[].user.login' | sort -u
+```
+
+Pick the login matching `*codex*` (commonly `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]`, sometimes
+`codex[bot]`) and export it as `BOT`.
+
+**Finding nothing here is NOT a stop condition.** On a PR Codex has never reviewed there is no bot
+login to find yet — that is the normal starting state, not a missing app. When the probe comes back
+empty, fall through to step 2A, post `@codex review`, and re-run this probe once a review lands;
+until then match any login containing `codex` when polling. Only conclude the app is absent after
+step 2A's bounded wait has expired with no review and no codex-like login anywhere on the PR — and
+then say so and stop, rather than looping against nothing.
+
+## 1. Identify the PR
+
+```bash
+gh pr view --json number,headRefName,headRefOid -q '{number,branch:.headRefName,head:.headRefOid}'
+```
+
+Switch to the PR branch if not already on it. Capture `OWNER`/`REPO` (`gh repo view --json owner,name`).
+
+## 2. The loop (max 5 iterations)
+
+Keep an explicit iteration counter and stop at 5 — the cap is a real bound to enforce, not a
+figure of speech. Each pass through A–G is one iteration; on hitting the cap, go straight to the
+report and list what is still unresolved rather than starting a sixth.
+
+### A. Ensure a fresh Codex review on the current head
+
+```bash
+HEAD_SHA=$(gh pr view <PR> --json headRefOid -q .headRefOid)
+# Only trigger if no Codex review already exists for this exact SHA:
+HAVE=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/reviews --paginate \
+  --jq "[.[] | select(.user.login==\"$BOT\" and .commit_id==\"$HEAD_SHA\")] | length")
+if [ "$HAVE" = "0" ]; then gh pr comment <PR> --body "@codex review"; fi
+```
+
+Poll for the review of THIS head to land. No check-run exists, so poll the reviews endpoint — and
+poll it on a **deadline**, never `while true`: a review that never arrives must end the skill with
+an honest timeout, not hang it.
+
+```bash
+# 10-minute deadline, one retry, then give up. DEADLINE/RETRIES are the
+# enforcement of the bounds this skill claims — do not drop them.
+wait_for_review() {                       # $1 = attempt label
+  local deadline=$(( SECONDS + 600 ))
+  while [ "$SECONDS" -lt "$deadline" ]; do
+    R=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/reviews --paginate \
+      --jq "[.[] | select(.user.login==\"$BOT\" and .commit_id==\"$HEAD_SHA\")] | last")
+    if [ -n "$R" ] && [ "$R" != "null" ]; then return 0; fi
+    echo "waiting for Codex review of $HEAD_SHA ($1)..."; sleep 15
+  done
+  return 1
+}
+
+if ! wait_for_review "first wait"; then
+  echo "no Codex review after 10m — retrying once"     # say the retry out loud
+  gh pr comment <PR> --body "@codex review"
+  if ! wait_for_review "after retry"; then
+    echo "Codex did not review $HEAD_SHA after a retry; stopping and reporting."
+    exit 1                                # honest timeout, never a success claim
+  fi
+fi
+```
+
+Codex can take several minutes on a large diff, which is why the deadline is generous. Report the
+retry in the final summary; two silent timeouts are the failure mode this guard exists to prevent.
+
+### B. Fetch the findings
+
+- **Summary**: the review `.body` from the object above — read the overall take and the priority
+  spread.
+- **Unresolved inline comments** on the current head:
+
+```bash
+gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/comments --paginate \
+  --jq ".[] | select(.user.login==\"$BOT\") | {id, path, line, body}"
+```
+
+Also pull the review threads + their resolved state via GraphQL (see step F) so you only act on
+unresolved ones.
+
+### C. Critically evaluate EACH comment (the core of this skill)
+
+For every comment, **verify the claim against the actual code and repo conventions before touching
+anything.** Read the whole file — not just the diff hunk Codex saw — plus the types and the call
+sites. Then classify:
+
+1. **CORRECT + actionable** — the finding is real and the fix improves the code. → fix it (step D).
+2. **FALSE POSITIVE / technically wrong** — the claim doesn't hold. → do **NOT** change code; write a
+   specific, evidence-based reply (cite the exact code/line/behavior that disproves it), then resolve.
+3. **Valid but out-of-scope / stylistic nit** that conflicts with repo convention or the PR's intent
+   → briefly decline with a reason, then resolve. Do not expand the PR's scope to satisfy a nit.
+
+**Hard rules:**
+- **Never modify correct code just to silence Codex.** Prefer a reasoned rebuttal.
+- When uncertain whether a claim holds, **investigate** (read more code, run the type-checker / tests)
+  rather than assume Codex is right. Default to skepticism.
+- If a suggested change would break other call sites, alter public behavior, or contradict a verified
+  repo convention, it is a category-2 rebuttal, not a fix.
+- Never fabricate identifiers to satisfy a comment (e.g. a Linear/ticket prefix). If Codex asks for a
+  ticket reference and none exists, say so; do not invent one.
+
+**Codex's common failure modes to watch for (default these to category 2):**
+- Diff-local reasoning: asserts a bug that the unchanged surrounding code already handles.
+- "This can be null/undefined here" where the type or an earlier guard already rules it out.
+- Invented race conditions or error paths with no actual trigger.
+- Suggestions that compile-break or break other callers.
+- Security/perf warnings with no exploit path or measurable cost.
+- Restating library/framework semantics incorrectly.
+- Style demands that contradict the repo's existing, consistent pattern.
+
+### D. Apply fixes — category 1 only
+
+Make the minimal correct change. Re-run the local gate if the repo has one (typecheck/tests) before
+moving on.
+
+### E. Commit and push FIRST, before resolving anything
+
+Order matters. A resolved thread is a claim that the fix is on the branch, so the push has to
+succeed before the claim is made — otherwise a failed commit or push leaves the PR unfixed with the
+finding marked resolved, and nobody looks at it again.
+
+If step D changed code:
+
+```bash
+# Stage ONLY the files your fixes touched — never `git add -A`, which sweeps up
+# unrelated work and untracked secrets sitting in the worktree.
+git status --short                     # look before you stage
+git add <path> [<path>...]             # the files named in the findings you fixed
+git commit -m "address codex review feedback (codexloop iteration N)"
+git push
+```
+
+Author the commit per the repo's norms (e.g. the user's identity; no AI attribution if that is the
+convention). Confirm the push actually landed before continuing:
+
+```bash
+git rev-parse HEAD
+gh pr view <PR> --json headRefOid -q .headRefOid   # must match
+```
+
+If they differ, stop: the fix is not on the PR, so nothing may be resolved yet.
+
+### F. Reply to and resolve every addressed thread
+
+Only now, with the fixes pushed, reply and resolve. Fetch unresolved threads, **following
+pagination** — a PR with more than 100 threads will otherwise look clean while unresolved findings
+sit on page two:
+
+```bash
+# Loop until hasNextPage is false, passing endCursor back in as $cursor.
+CURSOR=null
+while : ; do
+  PAGE=$(gh api graphql -F cursor="$CURSOR" -f query='
+  query($cursor: String) {
+    repository(owner: "OWNER", name: "REPO") {
+      pullRequest(number: PR_NUMBER) {
+        reviewThreads(first: 100, after: $cursor) {
+          pageInfo { hasNextPage endCursor }
+          nodes { id isResolved comments(first: 1) { nodes { databaseId author { login } path body } } }
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  }')
+  echo "$PAGE"          # collect nodes from every page before deciding the PR is clean
+  PI='.data.repository.pullRequest.reviewThreads.pageInfo'
+  [ "$(echo "$PAGE" | jq -r "$PI.hasNextPage")" = "true" ] || break
+  CURSOR=$(echo "$PAGE" | jq -r "$PI.endCursor")
+done
+```
+
+Reply on a thread's comment via `gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/comments -f body="..." -F in_reply_to=<comment_id>`,
+then resolve:
+
+```bash
+gh api graphql -f query='mutation { resolveReviewThread(input: {threadId: "THREAD_ID"}) { thread { isResolved } } }'
+```
+
+Resolve a thread only for comments authored by `$BOT` that you have fixed or rebutted — never
+blanket-resolve, and never resolve a human reviewer's thread.
+
+Threads you are **rebutting** need no push, so they may be replied to and resolved regardless of
+whether step D changed code.
+
+### G. Re-review
+
+Pushing re-triggers Codex when auto-review is on; otherwise post `@codex review`. Go back to **A**
+with the new head SHA. If step D changed nothing (all comments were rebutted), skip the push,
+ensure all threads are resolved, and exit.
+
+## 3. Exit conditions
+
+Stop when **any** is true:
+- Zero unresolved `$BOT` comments remain, and every comment this round was fixed or
+  rebutted+resolved. (There is no score to hit — this is "done".)
+- Max iterations (5) reached — report what remains.
+- Codex never responded after one retry — report the timeout honestly; do not claim success.
+
+## 4. Report
+
+```text
+Codexloop complete.
+  PR:                 #<n>
+  Bot login:          <resolved $BOT>
+  Iterations:         N
+  Comments fixed:     N   (genuinely-correct findings)
+  Comments rebutted:  N   (false positives / nits, resolved with rationale)
+  Remaining:          0
+```
+
+If it stopped at max iterations, list the remaining threads with your current assessment
+(fix-pending vs disputed) so a human can arbitrate.

package/.kiro/steering/geminiloop.md

@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
+<!-- Generated by scripts/build-adapters.sh. Do not edit directly. -->
+
+---
+inclusion: manual
+description: "Iteratively drives a GitHub PR to zero unresolved Gemini Code Assist comments — treats each one as a claim to verify, fixes only the genuinely-correct findings, and rebuts the rest with evidence instead of editing correct code."
+---
+
+# Geminiloop
+
+Drive a GitHub PR until Gemini Code Assist has no unresolved comments — **but do not cargo-cult
+its suggestions.** Gemini is often confidently wrong. Every comment is a *claim to verify*, not an
+instruction to obey. A wrong suggestion applied is worse than the comment itself.
+
+## How Gemini differs from other review bots
+
+- **No check-run, no score.** Gemini does not publish a `X/5` confidence or a `greptile` check. It
+  posts a **PR review** (state `COMMENTED`) authored by `gemini-code-assist[bot]` with a
+  `## Code Review` summary body plus inline review comments. Detection is by polling the *reviews*
+  endpoint, not a check-run. "Satisfied" = zero unresolved comments (each either fixed or rebutted),
+  since there is no numeric target.
+- **Auto-reviews on push/open.** It reviews automatically when a PR opens or gets new commits;
+  `/gemini review` forces a fresh pass.
+- **Severity, not confidence.** Inline comments carry a priority badge (a `![critical]` /
+  `![high]` / `![medium]` / `![low]` shields image) at the top of the body. Weight `critical`/`high`
+  seriously; treat `medium`/`low` as usually-skippable nits unless clearly correct.
+- **Higher false-positive rate.** This is the whole point of the skill: bias toward *rebut* over
+  *change*.
+
+## Not for
+
+- GitLab / Perforce (Gemini Code Assist is GitHub-only). For other review bots this catalog ships
+  `codexloop`, `coderabbitloop`, and `qodoloop`; for CI failures rather than review comments, use
+  `ci-fix-loop`.
+
+## 1. Identify the PR
+
+```bash
+gh pr view --json number,headRefName,headRefOid -q '{number,branch:.headRefName,head:.headRefOid}'
+```
+
+Switch to the PR branch if not already on it. Capture `OWNER`/`REPO` (`gh repo view --json owner,name`).
+
+## 2. The loop (max 5 iterations)
+
+Keep an explicit iteration counter and stop at 5 — the cap is a real bound to enforce, not a
+figure of speech. Each pass through A–G is one iteration; on hitting the cap, go straight to the
+report and list what is still unresolved rather than starting a sixth.
+
+### A. Ensure a fresh Gemini review on the current head
+
+Gemini auto-reviews new commits, but force a deterministic pass and record the head SHA:
+
+```bash
+HEAD_SHA=$(gh pr view <PR> --json headRefOid -q .headRefOid)
+# Only trigger if no gemini review already exists for this exact SHA:
+HAVE=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/reviews --paginate \
+  --jq "[.[] | select(.user.login==\"gemini-code-assist[bot]\" and .commit_id==\"$HEAD_SHA\")] | length")
+if [ "$HAVE" = "0" ]; then gh pr comment <PR> --body "/gemini review"; fi
+```
+
+Poll for the review of THIS head to land. No check-run exists, so poll the reviews endpoint — and
+poll it on a **deadline**, never `while true`: a review that never arrives must end the skill with
+an honest timeout, not hang it.
+
+```bash
+# 10-minute deadline, one retry, then give up.
+wait_for_review() {                       # $1 = attempt label
+  local deadline=$(( SECONDS + 600 ))
+  while [ "$SECONDS" -lt "$deadline" ]; do
+    R=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/reviews --paginate \
+      --jq "[.[] | select(.user.login==\"gemini-code-assist[bot]\" and .commit_id==\"$HEAD_SHA\")] | last")
+    if [ -n "$R" ] && [ "$R" != "null" ]; then return 0; fi
+    echo "waiting for Gemini review of $HEAD_SHA ($1)..."; sleep 15
+  done
+  return 1
+}
+
+if ! wait_for_review "first wait"; then
+  echo "no Gemini review after 10m — retrying once"     # say the retry out loud
+  gh pr comment <PR> --body "/gemini review"
+  if ! wait_for_review "after retry"; then
+    echo "Gemini did not review $HEAD_SHA after a retry; stopping and reporting."
+    exit 1                                # honest timeout, never a success claim
+  fi
+fi
+```
+
+Report the retry in the final summary; two silent timeouts are the failure mode this guard exists
+to prevent.
+
+### B. Fetch the findings
+
+- **Summary** (the `## Code Review` body): the review `.body` from the object above — read the
+  overall take and the severity spread.
+- **Unresolved inline comments** on the current head:
+
+```bash
+gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/comments --paginate \
+  --jq '.[] | select(.user.login=="gemini-code-assist[bot]") | {id, path, line, body}'
+```
+
+Also pull the review threads + their resolved state via GraphQL (see step F) so you only act on
+unresolved ones.
+
+### C. Critically evaluate EACH comment (the core of this skill)
+
+For every comment, **verify the claim against the actual code and repo conventions before touching
+anything.** Read the file, the surrounding code, the types, and any call sites. Then classify:
+
+1. **CORRECT + actionable** — the finding is real and the fix improves the code. → fix it (step D).
+2. **FALSE POSITIVE / technically wrong** — the claim doesn't hold. → do **NOT** change code; write a
+   specific, evidence-based reply (cite the exact code/line/behavior that disproves it), then resolve.
+3. **Valid but out-of-scope / stylistic nit** that conflicts with repo convention or the PR's intent
+   → briefly decline with a reason, then resolve. Do not expand the PR's scope to satisfy a nit.
+
+**Hard rules:**
+- **Never modify correct code just to silence Gemini.** Prefer a reasoned rebuttal.
+- When uncertain whether a claim holds, **investigate** (read more code, run the type-checker / tests)
+  rather than assume Gemini is right. Default to skepticism.
+- If a suggested change would break other call sites, alter public behavior, or contradict a verified
+  repo convention, it is a category-2 rebuttal, not a fix.
+- Never fabricate identifiers to satisfy a comment (e.g. a Linear/ticket prefix). If Gemini asks for a
+  ticket reference and none exists, say so; do not invent one.
+
+**Gemini's common failure modes to watch for (default these to category 2):**
+- Hallucinated APIs, options, or framework behavior stated as fact.
+- "Add a null/undefined check" where the type already guarantees presence.
+- Suggestions that compile-break or break other callers.
+- Security/perf warnings with no actual exploit path or measurable cost.
+- Restating library/framework semantics incorrectly.
+- Style demands that contradict the repo's existing, consistent pattern.
+
+### D. Apply fixes — category 1 only
+
+Make the minimal correct change. Re-run the local gate if the repo has one (typecheck/tests) before
+moving on.
+
+### E. Commit and push FIRST, before resolving anything
+
+Order matters. A resolved thread is a claim that the fix is on the branch, so the push has to
+succeed before the claim is made — otherwise a failed commit or push leaves the PR unfixed with the
+finding marked resolved, and nobody looks at it again.
+
+If step D changed code:
+
+```bash
+# Stage ONLY the files your fixes touched — never `git add -A`, which sweeps up
+# unrelated work and untracked secrets sitting in the worktree.
+git status --short                     # look before you stage
+git add <path> [<path>...]             # the files named in the findings you fixed
+git commit -m "address gemini review feedback (geminiloop iteration N)"
+git push
+```
+
+Author the commit per the repo's norms (e.g. the user's identity; no AI attribution if that is the
+convention). Confirm the push actually landed before continuing:
+
+```bash
+git rev-parse HEAD
+gh pr view <PR> --json headRefOid -q .headRefOid   # must match
+```
+
+If they differ, stop: the fix is not on the PR, so nothing may be resolved yet.
+
+### F. Reply to and resolve every addressed thread
+
+Only now, with the fixes pushed, reply and resolve. Fetch unresolved threads, **following
+pagination** — a PR with more than 100 threads will otherwise look clean while unresolved findings
+sit on page two:
+
+```bash
+# Loop until hasNextPage is false, passing endCursor back in as $cursor.
+CURSOR=null
+while : ; do
+  PAGE=$(gh api graphql -F cursor="$CURSOR" -f query='
+  query($cursor: String) {
+    repository(owner: "OWNER", name: "REPO") {
+      pullRequest(number: PR_NUMBER) {
+        reviewThreads(first: 100, after: $cursor) {
+          pageInfo { hasNextPage endCursor }
+          nodes { id isResolved comments(first: 1) { nodes { databaseId author { login } path body } } }
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  }')
+  echo "$PAGE"          # collect nodes from every page before deciding the PR is clean
+  PI='.data.repository.pullRequest.reviewThreads.pageInfo'
+  [ "$(echo "$PAGE" | jq -r "$PI.hasNextPage")" = "true" ] || break
+  CURSOR=$(echo "$PAGE" | jq -r "$PI.endCursor")
+done
+```
+
+Reply on a thread's comment via `gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR>/comments -f body="..." -F in_reply_to=<comment_id>`,
+then resolve:
+
+```bash
+gh api graphql -f query='mutation { resolveReviewThread(input: {threadId: "THREAD_ID"}) { thread { isResolved } } }'
+```
+
+Resolve a thread only for comments authored by `gemini-code-assist[bot]` that you have fixed or
+rebutted — never blanket-resolve, and never resolve a human reviewer's thread.
+
+Threads you are **rebutting** need no push, so they may be replied to and resolved regardless of
+whether step D changed code.
+
+### G. Re-review
+
+Pushing re-triggers Gemini automatically; go back to **A** with the new head SHA. If step D changed
+nothing (all comments were rebutted), skip the push, ensure all threads are resolved, and exit.
+
+## 3. Exit conditions
+
+Stop when **any** is true:
+- Zero unresolved `gemini-code-assist[bot]` comments remain, and every comment this round was fixed
+  or rebutted+resolved. (There is no score to hit — this is "done".)
+- Max iterations (5) reached — report what remains.
+
+## 4. Report
+
+```text
+Geminiloop complete.
+  PR:                 #<n>
+  Iterations:         N
+  Comments fixed:     N   (genuinely-correct findings)
+  Comments rebutted:  N   (false positives / nits, resolved with rationale)
+  Remaining:          0
+```
+
+If it stopped at max iterations, list the remaining threads with your current assessment
+(fix-pending vs disputed) so a human can arbitrate.