0.0.154

entry

@@ -83328,7 +83328,7 @@ function query({
 // package.json
 var package_default = {
   name: "@pullfrog/action",
-  version: "0.0.152",
+  version: "0.0.153",
   type: "module",
   files: [
     "index.js",
@@ -92628,36 +92628,38 @@ ${disableProgressComment ? "" : `
       name: "Review",
       description: "Review code, PRs, or implementations; provide feedback or suggestions; identify issues; or check code quality, style, and correctness",
       prompt: `Follow these steps:
-1. Checkout the PR using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/checkout_pr with the PR number. This fetches the PR branch and returns the PR diff in the \`diff\` field of the response. Use this diff for your review - it shows exactly what's in the PR (fetched via GitHub API, so it's not affected by main advancing after the branch was created).
 
-2. Start review session using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/start_review. This creates a pending review on GitHub and returns analysis guidance. Follow the guidance before adding comments.
+1. **CHECKOUT** - Use ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/checkout_pr with the PR number. This fetches the PR branch and returns the diff. Use this diff for your review - it shows exactly what's in the PR.
 
-3. **ANALYZE** - Before adding any comments, think through:
+2. **UNDERSTAND CONTEXT** - Read the modified files to understand the changes in context. Don't just look at the diff - understand how the changes affect the overall codebase.
+
+3. **ANALYZE** - Think through:
    - What does this PR change? Summarize in 1-2 sentences.
-   - Is the approach sound? If not, **stop here** and comment on the approach first. Don't waste time on implementation details if the approach is wrong.
+   - Is the approach sound? If not, focus on the approach first. Don't waste time on implementation details if the approach is wrong.
    - What bugs, edge cases, or security issues exist?
 
-4. **BEFORE COMMENTING** - For each potential comment, ask yourself:
-   - Is this a nitpick? Skip it unless explicitly requested.
-   - Would the codebase maintainer care about this feedback, based on what you can infer about the code quality standards in this repo?
+4. **DRAFT** - Mentally list all comments you would make. For each:
+   - Note the file path (relative to repo root, e.g., \`packages/core/src/utils.ts\`)
+   - Note the line number from the diff (use NEW file line number - shown after \`+\` in hunk headers like \`@@ -10,5 +12,8 @@\` means new file starts at line 12)
+   - Draft the comment text
 
-5. Add inline review comments one-by-one using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/add_review_comment
-   - Use **relative paths** from repo root (e.g., \`packages/core/src/utils.ts\`)
-   - Use the NEW file line number from the diff (shown after \`+\` in hunk headers like \`@@ -10,5 +12,8 @@\` means new file starts at line 12)
-   - Only comment on lines that appear in the diff. GitHub will reject comments on unchanged lines.
-   - For issues appearing in multiple places, comment on the FIRST occurrence and reference others (e.g., "also at lines X, Y")
+5. **SELF-CRITIQUE** - Before submitting, review your draft:
+   - Remove nitpicks unless the user explicitly told you to be nitpicky. Nitpicks may include: requesting documentation/docstrings/JSDoc, commenting on minor code/whitespace formatting, commenting on small changes unrelated to the main changes.
+   - Ensure each comment is actionable - would the author know exactly what to do?
+   - Would the codebase maintainer care about this feedback?
+   - If you have approach-level concerns, consider whether implementation-level comments are worth including
+   - For issues appearing in multiple places, keep only the FIRST occurrence and reference others (e.g., "also at lines X, Y")
 
-6. Submit the review using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/submit_review
-   - The "body" field is ONLY for: (1) a 1-3 sentence high-level overview, (2) urgency level (e.g., "minor suggestions" vs "blocking issues"), (3) critical security callouts (e.g., API key exposure)
+6. **SUBMIT** - Use ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review with:
+   - \`comments\`: Array of all inline comments with file paths and line numbers
+   - \`body\`: 1-3 sentence summary with urgency level (e.g., "minor suggestions" vs "blocking issues") and any critical callouts (e.g., API key exposure)
 
-**GENERAL GUIDANCE**
-
-- Do not leave any comments that are not potentially actionable. Do not leave complimentary comments just to be nice.
-- Do not nitpick unless instructed explicitly to do so by the user's additional instructions. This includes: requesting documentation/docstrings/JSDoc.
-- **CRITICAL: Prioritize per-line feedback over summary text.**
-  - All specific feedback MUST go in inline review comments with file paths and line numbers from the diff
-  - The vast majority of review content should be in inline review comments; the body should be brief and only summarize the urgency of the review and any cross-cutting concerns.
-  `
+**CRITICAL RULES**
+- 95%+ of review content should be in inline \`comments\` array, not the \`body\`
+- Only comment on lines that appear in the diff - GitHub will reject comments on unchanged lines
+- Do not leave complimentary comments just to be nice
+- Do not leave comments that are not actionable
+`
     },
     {
       name: "Plan",
@@ -123106,7 +123108,13 @@ function CheckoutPrTool(ctx) {
         mediaType: { format: "diff" }
       });
       const diffContent = diffResponse.data;
-      const diffPath = join8(process.env.PULLFROG_TEMP_DIR, `pr-${pull_number}.diff`);
+      const tempDir = process.env.PULLFROG_TEMP_DIR;
+      if (!tempDir) {
+        throw new Error(
+          "PULLFROG_TEMP_DIR not set - checkout_pr must run in pullfrog action context"
+        );
+      }
+      const diffPath = join8(tempDir, `pr-${pull_number}.diff`);
       writeFileSync4(diffPath, diffContent);
       log.debug(`wrote diff to ${diffPath} (${diffContent.length} bytes)`);
       const MAX_INLINE_DIFF_SIZE = 50 * 1024;
@@ -124466,224 +124474,7 @@ function PullRequestInfoTool(ctx) {
 }
 
 // mcp/review.ts
-var ADD_PULL_REQUEST_REVIEW_THREAD = `
-mutation AddPullRequestReviewThread($pullRequestReviewId: ID!, $path: String!, $line: Int!, $body: String!, $side: DiffSide) {
-  addPullRequestReviewThread(input: {
-    pullRequestReviewId: $pullRequestReviewId,
-    path: $path,
-    line: $line,
-    body: $body,
-    side: $side
-  }) {
-    thread {
-      id
-    }
-  }
-}
-`;
-async function findPendingReview(ctx, pull_number) {
-  const reviews = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.listReviews({
-    owner: ctx.owner,
-    repo: ctx.name,
-    pull_number,
-    per_page: 100
-  });
-  const pendingReview = reviews.data.find((r) => r.state === "PENDING");
-  if (pendingReview) {
-    return { id: pendingReview.id, node_id: pendingReview.node_id };
-  }
-  return null;
-}
-var StartReview = type({
-  pull_number: type.number.describe("The pull request number to review")
-});
-function StartReviewTool(ctx) {
-  return tool({
-    name: "start_review",
-    description: "Start a new review session for a pull request. Creates a pending review on GitHub. Must be called before add_review_comment.",
-    parameters: StartReview,
-    execute: execute(async ({ pull_number }) => {
-      if (ctx.toolState.review) {
-        throw new Error(
-          `Review session already in progress. Call submit_review first to finish it.`
-        );
-      }
-      const pr = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.get({
-        owner: ctx.owner,
-        repo: ctx.name,
-        pull_number
-      });
-      let reviewId;
-      let reviewNodeId;
-      log.debug(`creating pending review for PR #${pull_number}...`);
-      try {
-        const result = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.createReview({
-          owner: ctx.owner,
-          repo: ctx.name,
-          pull_number,
-          commit_id: pr.data.head.sha
-          // no 'event' = PENDING review
-        });
-        log.debug(`createReview response: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
-        if (!result.data.id || !result.data.node_id) {
-          log.debug(result);
-          throw new Error(
-            `createReview returned invalid data: id=${result.data.id}, node_id=${result.data.node_id}`
-          );
-        }
-        reviewId = result.data.id;
-        reviewNodeId = result.data.node_id;
-        log.debug(`created new pending review: id=${reviewId}`);
-      } catch (error41) {
-        const errorMessage = error41 instanceof Error ? error41.message : String(error41);
-        log.debug(`createReview failed: ${errorMessage}`);
-        if (errorMessage.includes("pending review")) {
-          log.debug(`pending review already exists, fetching existing review...`);
-          const existing = await findPendingReview(ctx, pull_number);
-          if (!existing) {
-            throw new Error(
-              "GitHub says a pending review exists but we couldn't find it. Try again or check the PR reviews."
-            );
-          }
-          reviewId = existing.id;
-          reviewNodeId = existing.node_id;
-          log.debug(`reusing existing pending review: id=${reviewId}`);
-        } else {
-          throw error41;
-        }
-      }
-      ctx.toolState.prNumber = pull_number;
-      ctx.toolState.review = {
-        nodeId: reviewNodeId,
-        id: reviewId
-      };
-      log.debug(`review session started: id=${reviewId}, nodeId=${reviewNodeId}`);
-      return {
-        message: `Review session started for PR #${pull_number}. Add comments with add_review_comment, then submit with submit_review.`
-      };
-    })
-  });
-}
-var AddReviewComment = type({
-  path: type.string.describe("The file path to comment on (relative to repo root)"),
-  line: type.number.describe(
-    "The line number in the file (use line numbers from the diff - the NEW file line number)"
-  ),
-  body: type.string.describe("The comment text for this specific line"),
-  side: type.enumerated("LEFT", "RIGHT").describe("Side of the diff: LEFT (old code) or RIGHT (new code). Defaults to RIGHT.").optional()
-});
-function AddReviewCommentTool(ctx) {
-  return tool({
-    name: "add_review_comment",
-    description: "Add a comment to the current review session. Must call start_review first. Comments are stored in draft state until submit_review is called.",
-    parameters: AddReviewComment,
-    execute: execute(async ({ path: path4, line, body, side }) => {
-      if (!ctx.toolState.review) {
-        throw new Error("No review session started. Call start_review first.");
-      }
-      const reviewNodeId = ctx.toolState.review.nodeId;
-      log.debug(
-        `adding review comment: reviewNodeId=${reviewNodeId}, path=${path4}, line=${line}, side=${side || "RIGHT"}`
-      );
-      let result;
-      try {
-        result = await ctx.octokit.graphql(
-          ADD_PULL_REQUEST_REVIEW_THREAD,
-          {
-            pullRequestReviewId: reviewNodeId,
-            path: path4,
-            line,
-            body,
-            side: side || "RIGHT"
-          }
-        );
-        log.debug(`addPullRequestReviewThread response: ${JSON.stringify(result)}`);
-      } catch (error41) {
-        const errorMsg = error41 instanceof Error ? error41.message : String(error41);
-        log.debug(`addPullRequestReviewThread error: ${errorMsg}`);
-        throw new Error(
-          `Failed to add comment to ${path4}:${line}. GraphQL error: ${errorMsg}. Ensure the line is part of the diff and the path is correct.`
-        );
-      }
-      if (!result) {
-        throw new Error(
-          `Failed to add comment to ${path4}:${line}. GraphQL returned null response.`
-        );
-      }
-      if (!result.addPullRequestReviewThread) {
-        throw new Error(
-          `Failed to add comment to ${path4}:${line}. addPullRequestReviewThread is null. Response: ${JSON.stringify(result)}`
-        );
-      }
-      if (!result.addPullRequestReviewThread.thread) {
-        throw new Error(
-          `Failed to add comment to ${path4}:${line}. thread is null. The line must be part of the diff. Response: ${JSON.stringify(result)}`
-        );
-      }
-      const threadId = result.addPullRequestReviewThread.thread.id;
-      log.debug(`review comment added: threadId=${threadId}`);
-      return {
-        success: true,
-        message: `Comment added to ${path4}:${line}`,
-        threadId
-      };
-    })
-  });
-}
-var SubmitReview = type({
-  body: type.string.describe(
-    "Review body text. Typically 1-3 sentences with high-level overview and urgency level. Action links are auto-appended."
-  ).optional()
-});
-function SubmitReviewTool(ctx) {
-  return tool({
-    name: "submit_review",
-    description: "Submit the current review session. All comments added via add_review_comment will be published. Must call start_review first.",
-    parameters: SubmitReview,
-    execute: execute(async ({ body }) => {
-      if (!ctx.toolState.review) {
-        throw new Error("No review session started. Call start_review first.");
-      }
-      if (ctx.toolState.prNumber === void 0) {
-        throw new Error("No PR context. Call checkout_pr or start_review first.");
-      }
-      const reviewId = ctx.toolState.review.id;
-      log.debug(
-        `submitting review: id=${reviewId}, nodeId=${ctx.toolState.review.nodeId}, prNumber=${ctx.toolState.prNumber}`
-      );
-      const apiUrl = process.env.API_URL || "https://pullfrog.com";
-      const fixAllUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${ctx.toolState.prNumber}?action=fix&review_id=${reviewId}`;
-      const fixApprovedUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${ctx.toolState.prNumber}?action=fix-approved&review_id=${reviewId}`;
-      const footer = buildPullfrogFooter({
-        workflowRun: { owner: ctx.owner, repo: ctx.name, runId: ctx.runId, jobId: ctx.jobId },
-        customParts: [`[Fix all \u2794](${fixAllUrl})`, `[Fix \u{1F44D}s \u2794](${fixApprovedUrl})`]
-      });
-      const bodyWithFooter = (body || "") + footer;
-      const result = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.submitReview({
-        owner: ctx.owner,
-        repo: ctx.name,
-        pull_number: ctx.toolState.prNumber,
-        review_id: reviewId,
-        event: "COMMENT",
-        body: bodyWithFooter
-      });
-      log.debug(`submitReview response: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
-      if (!result.data.id) {
-        throw new Error(`submitReview returned invalid data: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
-      }
-      log.debug(`review submitted: reviewId=${result.data.id}, state=${result.data.state}`);
-      delete ctx.toolState.review;
-      await deleteProgressComment(ctx);
-      return {
-        success: true,
-        reviewId: result.data.id,
-        html_url: result.data.html_url,
-        state: result.data.state
-      };
-    })
-  });
-}
-var Review = type({
+var CreatePullRequestReview = type({
   pull_number: type.number.describe("The pull request number to review"),
   body: type.string.describe(
     "1-2 sentence high-level summary ONLY. Include urgency level and critical callouts (e.g., API key leak). ALL specific feedback MUST go in 'comments' array instead."
@@ -124706,6 +124497,76 @@ var Review = type({
     "PRIMARY location for ALL feedback. 95%+ of review content should be here. Use the diff returned from checkout_pr to find correct line numbers (RIGHT side for new code, LEFT for old)."
   ).optional()
 });
+function CreatePullRequestReviewTool(ctx) {
+  return tool({
+    name: "create_pull_request_review",
+    description: "Submit a review for an existing pull request. IMPORTANT: 95%+ of feedback should be in 'comments' array with file paths and line numbers. Only use 'body' for a 1-2 sentence summary with urgency and critical callouts.",
+    parameters: CreatePullRequestReview,
+    execute: execute(async ({ pull_number, body, commit_id, comments = [] }) => {
+      ctx.toolState.prNumber = pull_number;
+      const pr = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.get({
+        owner: ctx.owner,
+        repo: ctx.name,
+        pull_number
+      });
+      const params = {
+        owner: ctx.owner,
+        repo: ctx.name,
+        pull_number,
+        event: "COMMENT"
+      };
+      if (body) params.body = body;
+      if (commit_id) {
+        params.commit_id = commit_id;
+      } else {
+        params.commit_id = pr.data.head.sha;
+      }
+      if (comments.length > 0) {
+        params.comments = comments.map((comment) => {
+          const reviewComment = {
+            ...comment
+          };
+          reviewComment.side = comment.side || "RIGHT";
+          if (comment.start_line) {
+            reviewComment.start_line = comment.start_line;
+            reviewComment.start_side = comment.side || "RIGHT";
+          }
+          return reviewComment;
+        });
+      }
+      const result = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.createReview(params);
+      log.debug(`createReview response: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
+      if (!result.data.id) {
+        throw new Error(`createReview returned invalid data: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
+      }
+      const reviewId = result.data.id;
+      const apiUrl = process.env.API_URL || "https://pullfrog.com";
+      const fixAllUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${pull_number}?action=fix&review_id=${reviewId}`;
+      const fixApprovedUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${pull_number}?action=fix-approved&review_id=${reviewId}`;
+      const footer = buildPullfrogFooter({
+        workflowRun: { owner: ctx.owner, repo: ctx.name, runId: ctx.runId, jobId: ctx.jobId },
+        customParts: [`[Fix all \u2794](${fixAllUrl})`, `[Fix \u{1F44D}s \u2794](${fixApprovedUrl})`]
+      });
+      const updatedBody = (body || "") + footer;
+      await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.updateReview({
+        owner: ctx.owner,
+        repo: ctx.name,
+        pull_number,
+        review_id: reviewId,
+        body: updatedBody
+      });
+      await deleteProgressComment(ctx);
+      return {
+        success: true,
+        reviewId,
+        html_url: result.data.html_url,
+        state: result.data.state,
+        user: result.data.user?.login,
+        submitted_at: result.data.submitted_at
+      };
+    })
+  });
+}
 
 // mcp/reviewComments.ts
 var REVIEW_THREADS_QUERY = `
@@ -124917,10 +124778,7 @@ async function startMcpHttpServer(ctx) {
     GetIssueCommentsTool(ctx),
     GetIssueEventsTool(ctx),
     PullRequestTool(ctx),
-    // ReviewTool(ctx),
-    StartReviewTool(ctx),
-    AddReviewCommentTool(ctx),
-    SubmitReviewTool(ctx),
+    CreatePullRequestReviewTool(ctx),
     PullRequestInfoTool(ctx),
     CheckoutPrTool(ctx),
     GetReviewCommentsTool(ctx),

mcp/checkout.ts

@@ -180,7 +180,13 @@ export function CheckoutPrTool(ctx: ToolContext) {
 
       // write diff to file for grep access
       const diffContent = diffResponse.data as unknown as string;
-      const diffPath = join(process.env.PULLFROG_TEMP_DIR!, `pr-${pull_number}.diff`);
+      const tempDir = process.env.PULLFROG_TEMP_DIR;
+      if (!tempDir) {
+        throw new Error(
+          "PULLFROG_TEMP_DIR not set - checkout_pr must run in pullfrog action context"
+        );
+      }
+      const diffPath = join(tempDir, `pr-${pull_number}.diff`);
       writeFileSync(diffPath, diffContent);
       log.debug(`wrote diff to ${diffPath} (${diffContent.length} bytes)`);
 

mcp/review.ts

@@ -6,16 +6,150 @@ import { log } from "../utils/cli.ts";
 import { deleteProgressComment } from "./comment.ts";
 import { execute, tool } from "./shared.ts";
 
+// one-shot review tool
+export const CreatePullRequestReview = type({
+  pull_number: type.number.describe("The pull request number to review"),
+  body: type.string
+    .describe(
+      "1-2 sentence high-level summary ONLY. Include urgency level and critical callouts (e.g., API key leak). ALL specific feedback MUST go in 'comments' array instead."
+    )
+    .optional(),
+  commit_id: type.string
+    .describe("Optional SHA of the commit being reviewed. Defaults to latest.")
+    .optional(),
+  comments: type({
+    path: type.string.describe("The file path to comment on (relative to repo root)"),
+    line: type.number.describe(
+      "The line number in the file (use line numbers from the diff - usually the RIGHT side/new code)"
+    ),
+    side: type
+      .enumerated("LEFT", "RIGHT")
+      .describe(
+        "Side of the diff: LEFT (old code) or RIGHT (new code). Defaults to RIGHT if not provided."
+      )
+      .optional(),
+    body: type.string.describe(
+      "The comment text for this specific line. For issues appearing multiple times, comment on the first occurrence and reference others."
+    ),
+    start_line: type.number
+      .describe("Start line for multi-line comments (optional, for commenting on ranges)")
+      .optional(),
+  })
+    .array()
+    .describe(
+      // FORK PR NOTE: checkout_pr returns the diff via GitHub API - use that for line numbers
+      "PRIMARY location for ALL feedback. 95%+ of review content should be here. Use the diff returned from checkout_pr to find correct line numbers (RIGHT side for new code, LEFT for old)."
+    )
+    .optional(),
+});
+
+export function CreatePullRequestReviewTool(ctx: ToolContext) {
+  return tool({
+    name: "create_pull_request_review",
+    description:
+      "Submit a review for an existing pull request. " +
+      "IMPORTANT: 95%+ of feedback should be in 'comments' array with file paths and line numbers. " +
+      "Only use 'body' for a 1-2 sentence summary with urgency and critical callouts.",
+    parameters: CreatePullRequestReview,
+    execute: execute(async ({ pull_number, body, commit_id, comments = [] }) => {
+      // set PR context
+      ctx.toolState.prNumber = pull_number;
+
+      // get the PR to determine the head commit if commit_id not provided
+      const pr = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.get({
+        owner: ctx.owner,
+        repo: ctx.name,
+        pull_number,
+      });
+
+      // compose the request
+      const params: RestEndpointMethodTypes["pulls"]["createReview"]["parameters"] = {
+        owner: ctx.owner,
+        repo: ctx.name,
+        pull_number,
+        event: "COMMENT",
+      };
+      if (body) params.body = body;
+      if (commit_id) {
+        params.commit_id = commit_id;
+      } else {
+        params.commit_id = pr.data.head.sha;
+      }
+      if (comments.length > 0) {
+        type ReviewComment = (typeof params.comments & {})[number];
+        // convert comments to the format expected by GitHub API
+        params.comments = comments.map((comment) => {
+          const reviewComment: ReviewComment = {
+            ...comment,
+          };
+          reviewComment.side = comment.side || "RIGHT";
+          if (comment.start_line) {
+            reviewComment.start_line = comment.start_line;
+            reviewComment.start_side = comment.side || "RIGHT";
+          }
+          return reviewComment;
+        });
+      }
+      const result = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.createReview(params);
+      log.debug(`createReview response: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
+      if (!result.data.id) {
+        throw new Error(`createReview returned invalid data: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
+      }
+      const reviewId = result.data.id;
+
+      // build quick links footer and update the review body
+      const apiUrl = process.env.API_URL || "https://pullfrog.com";
+      const fixAllUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${pull_number}?action=fix&review_id=${reviewId}`;
+      const fixApprovedUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${pull_number}?action=fix-approved&review_id=${reviewId}`;
+
+      const footer = buildPullfrogFooter({
+        workflowRun: { owner: ctx.owner, repo: ctx.name, runId: ctx.runId, jobId: ctx.jobId },
+        customParts: [`[Fix all ➔](${fixAllUrl})`, `[Fix 👍s ➔](${fixApprovedUrl})`],
+      });
+
+      const updatedBody = (body || "") + footer;
+
+      // update the review with the footer
+      await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.updateReview({
+        owner: ctx.owner,
+        repo: ctx.name,
+        pull_number,
+        review_id: reviewId,
+        body: updatedBody,
+      });
+
+      await deleteProgressComment(ctx);
+
+      return {
+        success: true,
+        reviewId,
+        html_url: result.data.html_url,
+        state: result.data.state,
+        user: result.data.user?.login,
+        submitted_at: result.data.submitted_at,
+      };
+    }),
+  });
+}
+
+// =============================================================================
+// COMMENTED OUT: Three-step review flow (start_review, add_review_comment, submit_review)
+// This approach used GraphQL to add comments to a pending review one-by-one,
+// but GitHub's API was returning null for valid lines. Keeping for reference.
+// =============================================================================
+
+/*
 // graphql mutation to add a comment thread to a pending review
 // note: REST API doesn't support adding comments to an existing pending review
 const ADD_PULL_REQUEST_REVIEW_THREAD = `
-mutation AddPullRequestReviewThread($pullRequestReviewId: ID!, $path: String!, $line: Int!, $body: String!, $side: DiffSide) {
+mutation AddPullRequestReviewThread($pullRequestReviewId: ID!, $path: String!, $line: Int!, $body: String!, $side: DiffSide, $subjectType: PullRequestReviewThreadSubjectType) {
   addPullRequestReviewThread(input: {
     pullRequestReviewId: $pullRequestReviewId,
     path: $path,
     line: $line,
     body: $body,
-    side: $side
+    side: $side,
+    subjectType: $subjectType
   }) {
     thread {
       id
@@ -180,6 +314,7 @@ export function AddReviewCommentTool(ctx: ToolContext) {
             line,
             body,
             side: side || "RIGHT",
+            subjectType: "LINE",
           }
         );
         log.debug(`addPullRequestReviewThread response: ${JSON.stringify(result)}`);
@@ -293,130 +428,4 @@ export function SubmitReviewTool(ctx: ToolContext) {
     }),
   });
 }
-
-// legacy tool - kept for backwards compatibility
-export const Review = type({
-  pull_number: type.number.describe("The pull request number to review"),
-  body: type.string
-    .describe(
-      "1-2 sentence high-level summary ONLY. Include urgency level and critical callouts (e.g., API key leak). ALL specific feedback MUST go in 'comments' array instead."
-    )
-    .optional(),
-  commit_id: type.string
-    .describe("Optional SHA of the commit being reviewed. Defaults to latest.")
-    .optional(),
-  comments: type({
-    path: type.string.describe("The file path to comment on (relative to repo root)"),
-    line: type.number.describe(
-      "The line number in the file (use line numbers from the diff - usually the RIGHT side/new code)"
-    ),
-    side: type
-      .enumerated("LEFT", "RIGHT")
-      .describe(
-        "Side of the diff: LEFT (old code) or RIGHT (new code). Defaults to RIGHT if not provided."
-      )
-      .optional(),
-    body: type.string.describe(
-      "The comment text for this specific line. For issues appearing multiple times, comment on the first occurrence and reference others."
-    ),
-    start_line: type.number
-      .describe("Start line for multi-line comments (optional, for commenting on ranges)")
-      .optional(),
-  })
-    .array()
-    .describe(
-      // FORK PR NOTE: checkout_pr returns the diff via GitHub API - use that for line numbers
-      "PRIMARY location for ALL feedback. 95%+ of review content should be here. Use the diff returned from checkout_pr to find correct line numbers (RIGHT side for new code, LEFT for old)."
-    )
-    .optional(),
-});
-
-export function ReviewTool(ctx: ToolContext) {
-  return tool({
-    name: "submit_pull_request_review",
-    description:
-      "DEPRECATED: Use start_review, add_review_comment, and submit_review instead for iterative review workflow. " +
-      "Submit a review for an existing pull request. " +
-      "IMPORTANT: 95%+ of feedback should be in 'comments' array with file paths and line numbers. " +
-      "Only use 'body' for a 1-2 sentence summary with urgency and critical callouts.",
-    parameters: Review,
-    execute: execute(async ({ pull_number, body, commit_id, comments = [] }) => {
-      // set PR context
-      ctx.toolState.prNumber = pull_number;
-
-      // get the PR to determine the head commit if commit_id not provided
-      const pr = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.get({
-        owner: ctx.owner,
-        repo: ctx.name,
-        pull_number,
-      });
-
-      // compose the request
-      const params: RestEndpointMethodTypes["pulls"]["createReview"]["parameters"] = {
-        owner: ctx.owner,
-        repo: ctx.name,
-        pull_number,
-        event: "COMMENT",
-      };
-      if (body) params.body = body;
-      if (commit_id) {
-        params.commit_id = commit_id;
-      } else {
-        params.commit_id = pr.data.head.sha;
-      }
-      if (comments.length > 0) {
-        type ReviewComment = (typeof params.comments & {})[number];
-        // convert comments to the format expected by GitHub API
-        params.comments = comments.map((comment) => {
-          const reviewComment: ReviewComment = {
-            ...comment,
-          };
-          reviewComment.side = comment.side || "RIGHT";
-          if (comment.start_line) {
-            reviewComment.start_line = comment.start_line;
-            reviewComment.start_side = comment.side || "RIGHT";
-          }
-          return reviewComment;
-        });
-      }
-      const result = await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.createReview(params);
-      log.debug(`createReview (legacy) response: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
-      if (!result.data.id) {
-        throw new Error(`createReview returned invalid data: ${JSON.stringify(result.data)}`);
-      }
-      const reviewId = result.data.id;
-
-      // build quick links footer and update the review body
-      const apiUrl = process.env.API_URL || "https://pullfrog.com";
-      const fixAllUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${pull_number}?action=fix&review_id=${reviewId}`;
-      const fixApprovedUrl = `${apiUrl}/trigger/${ctx.owner}/${ctx.name}/${pull_number}?action=fix-approved&review_id=${reviewId}`;
-
-      const footer = buildPullfrogFooter({
-        workflowRun: { owner: ctx.owner, repo: ctx.name, runId: ctx.runId, jobId: ctx.jobId },
-        customParts: [`[Fix all ➔](${fixAllUrl})`, `[Fix 👍s ➔](${fixApprovedUrl})`],
-      });
-
-      const updatedBody = (body || "") + footer;
-
-      // update the review with the footer
-      await ctx.octokit.rest.pulls.updateReview({
-        owner: ctx.owner,
-        repo: ctx.name,
-        pull_number,
-        review_id: reviewId,
-        body: updatedBody,
-      });
-
-      await deleteProgressComment(ctx);
-
-      return {
-        success: true,
-        reviewId,
-        html_url: result.data.html_url,
-        state: result.data.state,
-        user: result.data.user?.login,
-        submitted_at: result.data.submitted_at,
-      };
-    }),
-  });
-}
+*/

mcp/server.ts

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ import { IssueInfoTool } from "./issueInfo.ts";
 import { AddLabelsTool } from "./labels.ts";
 import { PullRequestTool } from "./pr.ts";
 import { PullRequestInfoTool } from "./prInfo.ts";
-import { AddReviewCommentTool, StartReviewTool, SubmitReviewTool } from "./review.ts";
+import { CreatePullRequestReviewTool } from "./review.ts";
 import { GetReviewCommentsTool, ListPullRequestReviewsTool } from "./reviewComments.ts";
 import { SelectModeTool } from "./selectMode.ts";
 import { addTools } from "./shared.ts";
@@ -84,10 +84,7 @@ export async function startMcpHttpServer(
     GetIssueCommentsTool(ctx),
     GetIssueEventsTool(ctx),
     PullRequestTool(ctx),
-    // ReviewTool(ctx),
-    StartReviewTool(ctx),
-    AddReviewCommentTool(ctx),
-    SubmitReviewTool(ctx),
+    CreatePullRequestReviewTool(ctx),
     PullRequestInfoTool(ctx),
     CheckoutPrTool(ctx),
     GetReviewCommentsTool(ctx),

modes.ts

@@ -100,36 +100,38 @@ ${
       description:
         "Review code, PRs, or implementations; provide feedback or suggestions; identify issues; or check code quality, style, and correctness",
       prompt: `Follow these steps:
-1. Checkout the PR using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/checkout_pr with the PR number. This fetches the PR branch and returns the PR diff in the \`diff\` field of the response. Use this diff for your review - it shows exactly what's in the PR (fetched via GitHub API, so it's not affected by main advancing after the branch was created).
 
-2. Start review session using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/start_review. This creates a pending review on GitHub and returns analysis guidance. Follow the guidance before adding comments.
+1. **CHECKOUT** - Use ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/checkout_pr with the PR number. This fetches the PR branch and returns the diff. Use this diff for your review - it shows exactly what's in the PR.
 
-3. **ANALYZE** - Before adding any comments, think through:
+2. **UNDERSTAND CONTEXT** - Read the modified files to understand the changes in context. Don't just look at the diff - understand how the changes affect the overall codebase.
+
+3. **ANALYZE** - Think through:
    - What does this PR change? Summarize in 1-2 sentences.
-   - Is the approach sound? If not, **stop here** and comment on the approach first. Don't waste time on implementation details if the approach is wrong.
+   - Is the approach sound? If not, focus on the approach first. Don't waste time on implementation details if the approach is wrong.
    - What bugs, edge cases, or security issues exist?
 
-4. **BEFORE COMMENTING** - For each potential comment, ask yourself:
-   - Is this a nitpick? Skip it unless explicitly requested.
-   - Would the codebase maintainer care about this feedback, based on what you can infer about the code quality standards in this repo?
+4. **DRAFT** - Mentally list all comments you would make. For each:
+   - Note the file path (relative to repo root, e.g., \`packages/core/src/utils.ts\`)
+   - Note the line number from the diff (use NEW file line number - shown after \`+\` in hunk headers like \`@@ -10,5 +12,8 @@\` means new file starts at line 12)
+   - Draft the comment text
 
-5. Add inline review comments one-by-one using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/add_review_comment
-   - Use **relative paths** from repo root (e.g., \`packages/core/src/utils.ts\`)
-   - Use the NEW file line number from the diff (shown after \`+\` in hunk headers like \`@@ -10,5 +12,8 @@\` means new file starts at line 12)
-   - Only comment on lines that appear in the diff. GitHub will reject comments on unchanged lines.
-   - For issues appearing in multiple places, comment on the FIRST occurrence and reference others (e.g., "also at lines X, Y")
+5. **SELF-CRITIQUE** - Before submitting, review your draft:
+   - Remove nitpicks unless the user explicitly told you to be nitpicky. Nitpicks may include: requesting documentation/docstrings/JSDoc, commenting on minor code/whitespace formatting, commenting on small changes unrelated to the main changes.
+   - Ensure each comment is actionable - would the author know exactly what to do?
+   - Would the codebase maintainer care about this feedback?
+   - If you have approach-level concerns, consider whether implementation-level comments are worth including
+   - For issues appearing in multiple places, keep only the FIRST occurrence and reference others (e.g., "also at lines X, Y")
 
-6. Submit the review using ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/submit_review
-   - The "body" field is ONLY for: (1) a 1-3 sentence high-level overview, (2) urgency level (e.g., "minor suggestions" vs "blocking issues"), (3) critical security callouts (e.g., API key exposure)
+6. **SUBMIT** - Use ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review with:
+   - \`comments\`: Array of all inline comments with file paths and line numbers
+   - \`body\`: 1-3 sentence summary with urgency level (e.g., "minor suggestions" vs "blocking issues") and any critical callouts (e.g., API key exposure)
 
-**GENERAL GUIDANCE**
-
-- Do not leave any comments that are not potentially actionable. Do not leave complimentary comments just to be nice.
-- Do not nitpick unless instructed explicitly to do so by the user's additional instructions. This includes: requesting documentation/docstrings/JSDoc.
-- **CRITICAL: Prioritize per-line feedback over summary text.**
-  - All specific feedback MUST go in inline review comments with file paths and line numbers from the diff
-  - The vast majority of review content should be in inline review comments; the body should be brief and only summarize the urgency of the review and any cross-cutting concerns.
-  `,
+**CRITICAL RULES**
+- 95%+ of review content should be in inline \`comments\` array, not the \`body\`
+- Only comment on lines that appear in the diff - GitHub will reject comments on unchanged lines
+- Do not leave complimentary comments just to be nice
+- Do not leave comments that are not actionable
+`,
     },
     {
       name: "Plan",

package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@pullfrog/action",
-  "version": "0.0.152",
+  "version": "0.0.154",
   "type": "module",
   "files": [
     "index.js",