pullfrog[bot] 4c1413d925 fix(action): flip wasUpdated on substantive MCP write tools (#563) (#577)
* fix(action): flip wasUpdated on substantive MCP write tools (#563)

Review/Respond/etc. agents that submit a `create_pull_request_review`,
`create_issue_comment`, or `update_pull_request_body` and exit without
calling `report_progress` were being marked as workflow failures by the
strict completion check in handleAgentResult. Extend the set of tools
that flip toolState.wasUpdated so a substantive user-visible artifact
satisfies the check. The isReviewMode bypass is retained for
IncrementalReview's non-substantive path.

Flag is set BEFORE patchWorkflowRunFields / deleteProgressComment in
each tool so a best-effort cleanup failure does not undo the signal.

* fix(action): use finalSummaryWritten for stranded progress cleanup

The stranded-progress-comment cleanup at the end of main() previously
fired only when toolState.wasUpdated was false (or the tracker was the
last writer). With wasUpdated now set by additional MCP write tools
(create_issue_comment, update_pull_request_body), an agent that produced
a substantive artifact via one of those tools and skipped report_progress
would leave the placeholder "Leaping into action" comment intact — the
post-script then converted it into an error message on a successful run.

Key the cleanup off finalSummaryWritten instead. That flag is only set
when report_progress actually wrote the progress comment, so it cleanly
distinguishes "comment is finalized" from "agent did other work but
never touched the progress comment".

* refactor(mcp): extract markSubstantiveArtifact() helper

replaces 4 inline `ctx.toolState.wasUpdated = true` flips in CreateCommentTool, UpdatePullRequestBodyTool, and CreatePullRequestReviewTool with a single helper in mcp/server.ts. JSDoc on the helper documents the contract (call BEFORE downstream patch/cleanup; gates the strict completion check and stranded-comment cleanup) so future MCP write tool authors only need to grep for one symbol.

no behavioral change.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

* fix(mcp): only flip finalSummaryWritten after non-skipped write

Previously the flag was set unconditionally on any non-plan call,
including paths where reportProgress skipped (silent events, deleted
comment, no issue/PR target). The cleanup check in main.ts is
safeguarded by toolState.progressComment so the bug doesn't manifest
today, but aligning the flag with actual writes matches the wasUpdated
pattern and the design intent in the cleanup plan.

* refactor(mcp): inline markSubstantiveArtifact helper

---------

Co-authored-by: pullfrog[bot] <226033991+pullfrog[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: David Blass <david@arktype.io>
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
2026-05-06 21:05:53 +00:00
2026-01-16 08:00:16 +00:00
2026-03-12 05:22:51 +00:00
2025-08-27 16:53:48 -07:00
2026-01-19 08:41:56 +00:00
2026-03-12 05:22:51 +00:00
2026-03-12 05:22:51 +00:00

Green Pullfrog logo
Pullfrog

Bring your favorite coding agent into GitHub


🚀 Pullfrog is in beta! We're onboarding users in waves. Get on the waitlist →


What is Pullfrog?

Pullfrog is a GitHub bot that brings the full power of your favorite coding agents into GitHub. It's open source and powered by GitHub Actions.

  • Tag @pullfrog — Tag @pullfrog in a comment anywhere in your repo. It will pull in any relevant context using the action's internal MCP server and perform the appropriate task.
  • Prompt from the web — Trigger arbitrary tasks from the Pullfrog dashboard
  • Automated triggers — Configure Pullfrog to trigger agent runs in response to specific events. Each of these triggers can be associated with custom prompt instructions.
    • issue created
    • issue labeled
    • PR created
    • PR review created
    • PR review requested
    • and more...

Pullfrog is the bridge between your preferred coding agents and GitHub. Use it for:

  • 🤖 Coding tasks — Tell @pullfrog to implement something and it'll spin up a PR. If CI fails, it'll read the logs and attempt a fix automatically. It'll automatically address any PR reviews too.
  • 🔍 PR review — Coding agents are great at reviewing PRs. Using the "PR created" trigger, you can configure Pullfrog to auto-review new PRs.
  • 🤙 Issue management — Via the "issue created" trigger, Pullfrog can automatically respond to common questions, create implementation plans, and link to related issues/PRs. Or (if you're feeling lucky) you can prompt it to immediately attempt a PR addressing new issues.
  • Literally whatever — Want to have the agent automatically add docs to all new PRs? Cut a new release with agent-written notes on every commit to main? Pullfrog lets you do it.

Standalone Usage

You can also use pullfrog/pullfrog as a step in your own workflows. The action exposes a result output that can be consumed by subsequent steps.

Example: Auto-generate release notes on new tags

name: Release
on:
  push:
    tags: ['v*']

permissions:
  contents: write

jobs:
  release:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Checkout
        uses: actions/checkout@v4
        with:
          fetch-depth: 0

      - name: Generate release notes
        id: notes
        uses: pullfrog/pullfrog@v0
        with:
          prompt: |
            Generate release notes for ${{ github.ref_name }}.
            Compare commits between this tag and the previous tag.
            Format as markdown: summary paragraph, then ### Features, ### Fixes, ### Breaking Changes sections.
            Omit empty sections. Be concise.
        env:
          ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}

      # write to file to avoid shell escaping issues with special characters
      - name: Create GitHub release
        run: |
          notesfile="$RUNNER_TEMP/release-notes-$GITHUB_RUN_ID.md"
          printf '%s' "$NOTES" > "$notesfile"
          gh release create ${{ github.ref_name }} --title "${{ github.ref_name }}" --notes-file "$notesfile"
        env:
          GH_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }}
          NOTES: ${{ steps.notes.outputs.result }}

Example: Structured Output with Zod Schema

You can force the agent to return structured JSON output by providing a JSON schema. This allows you to reliably parse and use the agent's response in subsequent workflow steps.

You can define your JSON schema directly or uou can use any validation library that converts to JSON Schema. Here's an example using Zod:

name: Release Check
on:
  pull_request:
    types: [closed]

jobs:
  check-release:
    if: github.event.pull_request.merged == true
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4

      - name: Install dependencies
        run: npm install --no-save --no-package-lock zod @actions/core

      - name: Generate Schema
        id: schema
        run: |
          node -e '
            import { z } from "zod";
            import { setOutput } from "@actions/core";
            const schema = z.object({
              version: z.string().describe("Semantic version number (e.g. 1.0.0)"),
              isBreaking: z.boolean().describe("Whether this release contains breaking changes"),
              changelog: z.array(z.string()).describe("List of changes in this release"),
            });
            setOutput("schema", JSON.stringify(z.toJSONSchema(schema)));
          '

      - name: Analyze PR
        id: analysis
        uses: pullfrog/pullfrog@v0
        with:
          prompt: |
            Analyze this PR and determine semantic versioning impact.
            Return a JSON object matching the provided schema.
          output_schema: ${{ steps.schema.outputs.schema }}
        env:
          ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}

      - name: Process Result
        run: |
          # Parse the JSON result using fromJSON()
          echo "Version: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).version }}"
          echo "Breaking: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).isBreaking }}"
S
Description
Self-hosted Ollama-powered code review bot for Gitea Actions based on pullfrog
Readme MIT 27 MiB
Languages
TypeScript 97.9%
Shell 0.7%
Dockerfile 0.7%
JavaScript 0.7%