8.1 KiB
Greptile Comment Triage
Shared reference for fetching, filtering, and classifying Greptile review comments on GitHub PRs. Both /review (Step 2.5) and /ship (Step 3.75) reference this document.
Fetch
Run these commands to detect the PR and fetch comments. Both API calls run in parallel.
REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner --jq '.nameWithOwner' 2>/dev/null)
PR_NUMBER=$(gh pr view --json number --jq '.number' 2>/dev/null)
If either fails or is empty: Skip Greptile triage silently. This integration is additive — the workflow works without it.
# Fetch line-level review comments AND top-level PR comments in parallel
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
--jq '.[] | select(.user.login == "greptile-apps[bot]") | select(.position != null) | {id: .id, path: .path, line: .line, body: .body, html_url: .html_url, source: "line-level"}' > /tmp/greptile_line.json &
gh api repos/$REPO/issues/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
--jq '.[] | select(.user.login == "greptile-apps[bot]") | {id: .id, body: .body, html_url: .html_url, source: "top-level"}' > /tmp/greptile_top.json &
wait
If API errors or zero Greptile comments across both endpoints: Skip silently.
The position != null filter on line-level comments automatically skips outdated comments from force-pushed code.
Suppressions Check
Derive the project-specific history path:
REMOTE_SLUG=$(browse/bin/remote-slug 2>/dev/null || ~/.claude/skills/gstack/browse/bin/remote-slug 2>/dev/null || basename "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)")
PROJECT_HISTORY="$HOME/.gstack/projects/$REMOTE_SLUG/greptile-history.md"
Read $PROJECT_HISTORY if it exists (per-project suppressions). Each line records a previous triage outcome:
<date> | <repo> | <type:fp|fix|already-fixed> | <file-pattern> | <category>
Categories (fixed set): race-condition, null-check, error-handling, style, type-safety, security, performance, correctness, other
Match each fetched comment against entries where:
type == fp(only suppress known false positives, not previously fixed real issues)repomatches the current repofile-patternmatches the comment's file pathcategorymatches the issue type in the comment
Skip matched comments as SUPPRESSED.
If the history file doesn't exist or has unparseable lines, skip those lines and continue — never fail on a malformed history file.
Classify
For each non-suppressed comment:
- Line-level comments: Read the file at the indicated
path:lineand surrounding context (±10 lines) - Top-level comments: Read the full comment body
- Cross-reference the comment against the full diff (
git diff origin/main) and the review checklist - Classify:
- VALID & ACTIONABLE — a real bug, race condition, security issue, or correctness problem that exists in the current code
- VALID BUT ALREADY FIXED — a real issue that was addressed in a subsequent commit on the branch. Identify the fixing commit SHA.
- FALSE POSITIVE — the comment misunderstands the code, flags something handled elsewhere, or is stylistic noise
- SUPPRESSED — already filtered in the suppressions check above
Reply APIs
When replying to Greptile comments, use the correct endpoint based on comment source:
Line-level comments (from pulls/$PR/comments):
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/comments/$COMMENT_ID/replies \
-f body="<reply text>"
Top-level comments (from issues/$PR/comments):
gh api repos/$REPO/issues/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
-f body="<reply text>"
If a reply POST fails (e.g., PR was closed, no write permission): warn and continue. Do not stop the workflow for a failed reply.
Reply Templates
Use these templates for every Greptile reply. Always include concrete evidence — never post vague replies.
Tier 1 (First response) — Friendly, evidence-included
For FIXES (user chose to fix the issue):
**Fixed** in `<commit-sha>`.
\`\`\`diff
- <old problematic line(s)>
+ <new fixed line(s)>
\`\`\`
**Why:** <1-sentence explanation of what was wrong and how the fix addresses it>
For ALREADY FIXED (issue addressed in a prior commit on the branch):
**Already fixed** in `<commit-sha>`.
**What was done:** <1-2 sentences describing how the existing commit addresses this issue>
For FALSE POSITIVES (the comment is incorrect):
**Not a bug.** <1 sentence directly stating why this is incorrect>
**Evidence:**
- <specific code reference showing the pattern is safe/correct>
- <e.g., "The nil check is handled by `ActiveRecord::FinderMethods#find` which raises RecordNotFound, not nil">
**Suggested re-rank:** This appears to be a `<style|noise|misread>` issue, not a `<what Greptile called it>`. Consider lowering severity.
Tier 2 (Greptile re-flags after prior reply) — Firm, overwhelming evidence
Use Tier 2 when escalation detection (below) identifies a prior GStack reply on the same thread. Include maximum evidence to close the discussion.
**This has been reviewed and confirmed as [intentional/already-fixed/not-a-bug].**
\`\`\`diff
<full relevant diff showing the change or safe pattern>
\`\`\`
**Evidence chain:**
1. <file:line permalink showing the safe pattern or fix>
2. <commit SHA where it was addressed, if applicable>
3. <architecture rationale or design decision, if applicable>
**Suggested re-rank:** Please recalibrate — this is a `<actual category>` issue, not `<claimed category>`. [Link to specific file change permalink if helpful]
Escalation Detection
Before composing a reply, check if a prior GStack reply already exists on this comment thread:
-
For line-level comments: Fetch replies via
gh api repos/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/comments/$COMMENT_ID/replies. Check if any reply body contains GStack markers:**Fixed**,**Not a bug.**,**Already fixed**. -
For top-level comments: Scan the fetched issue comments for replies posted after the Greptile comment that contain GStack markers.
-
If a prior GStack reply exists AND Greptile posted again on the same file+category: Use Tier 2 (firm) templates.
-
If no prior GStack reply exists: Use Tier 1 (friendly) templates.
If escalation detection fails (API error, ambiguous thread): default to Tier 1. Never escalate on ambiguity.
Severity Assessment & Re-ranking
When classifying comments, also assess whether Greptile's implied severity matches reality:
- If Greptile flags something as a security/correctness/race-condition issue but it's actually a style/performance nit: include
**Suggested re-rank:**in the reply requesting the category be corrected. - If Greptile flags a low-severity style issue as if it were critical: push back in the reply.
- Always be specific about why the re-ranking is warranted — cite code and line numbers, not opinions.
History File Writes
Before writing, ensure both directories exist:
REMOTE_SLUG=$(browse/bin/remote-slug 2>/dev/null || ~/.claude/skills/gstack/browse/bin/remote-slug 2>/dev/null || basename "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)")
mkdir -p "$HOME/.gstack/projects/$REMOTE_SLUG"
mkdir -p ~/.gstack
Append one line per triage outcome to both files (per-project for suppressions, global for retro):
~/.gstack/projects/$REMOTE_SLUG/greptile-history.md(per-project)~/.gstack/greptile-history.md(global aggregate)
Format:
<YYYY-MM-DD> | <owner/repo> | <type> | <file-pattern> | <category>
Example entries:
2026-03-13 | garrytan/myapp | fp | app/services/auth_service.rb | race-condition
2026-03-13 | garrytan/myapp | fix | app/models/user.rb | null-check
2026-03-13 | garrytan/myapp | already-fixed | lib/payments.rb | error-handling
Output Format
Include a Greptile summary in the output header:
+ N Greptile comments (X valid, Y fixed, Z FP)
For each classified comment, show:
- Classification tag:
[VALID],[FIXED],[FALSE POSITIVE],[SUPPRESSED] - File:line reference (for line-level) or
[top-level](for top-level) - One-line body summary
- Permalink URL (the
html_urlfield)