* fix: snapshot review state so progress comment cleanup actually fires
postReviewCleanup deletes toolState.review as its second statement, so
the defense-in-depth `if (toolState.review && progressCommentId)` branch
right after never saw a truthy value. This left an orphaned progress
comment alongside the submitted review whenever the agent called
report_progress despite Review/IncrementalReview mode instructions
(seen in the wild on colinhacks/zod#5767).
Snapshot the boolean before postReviewCleanup runs.
* move progress-comment cleanup into create_pull_request_review
The previous commit snapshotted toolState.review to work around
postReviewCleanup deleting it before the cleanup branch could read it.
That fixed the symptom but kept a fragile design: the rule "review
submitted → progress comment is noise" was enforced from the bottom of
main.ts via a flag set in one place and consumed in another, with a
helper between them that mutated the same flag for unrelated reasons.
Move the rule to its natural owner. create_pull_request_review now
calls deleteProgressComment immediately after the review is persisted,
so the cleanup is atomic with submission. This:
- closes the catch-block hole — a review submitted right before a
timeout/crash now still cleans up its progress comment.
- removes the dead "defense-in-depth" branch in main.ts that was the
original bug surface.
- relies on the existing progressCommentId=null no-op path in
reportProgress to make any later report_progress call a no-op (so
the misbehavior path can't re-create the orphan).
- only fires for Review/IncrementalReview in practice — those are the
only modes that call create_pull_request_review, and both are
prompted not to call report_progress. Build/AddressReviews/Plan
never reach this code path, so their progress comments remain
untouched.
Stranded-comment cleanup in main.ts is unchanged and still handles
the truly orphaned case (no review, no report_progress).
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:Releaseon:push:tags:['v*']permissions:contents:writejobs:release:runs-on:ubuntu-lateststeps:- name:Checkoutuses:actions/checkout@v4with:fetch-depth:0- name:Generate release notesid:notesuses:pullfrog/pullfrog@v0with: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 releaserun:| 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:${{ steps.notes.outputs.result }}
Example: Structured Output with Zod Schema
You can force the agent to return structured JSON output by providing a JSON schema. This allows you to reliably parse and use the agent's response in subsequent workflow steps.
You can define your JSON schema directly or uou can use any validation library that converts to JSON Schema. Here's an example using Zod:
name:Release Checkon:pull_request:types:[closed]jobs:check-release:if:github.event.pull_request.merged == trueruns-on:ubuntu-lateststeps:- uses:actions/checkout@v4- name:Install dependenciesrun:npm install --no-save --no-package-lock zod @actions/core- name:Generate Schemaid:schemarun:| node -e '
import { z } from "zod";
import { setOutput } from "@actions/core";
const schema = z.object({
version: z.string().describe("Semantic version number (e.g. 1.0.0)"),
isBreaking: z.boolean().describe("Whether this release contains breaking changes"),
changelog: z.array(z.string()).describe("List of changes in this release"),
});
setOutput("schema", JSON.stringify(z.toJSONSchema(schema)));
'- name:Analyze PRid:analysisuses:pullfrog/pullfrog@v0with:prompt:| Analyze this PR and determine semantic versioning impact.
Return a JSON object matching the provided schema.output_schema:${{ steps.schema.outputs.schema }}env:ANTHROPIC_API_KEY:${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}- name:Process Resultrun:| # Parse the JSON result using fromJSON()
echo "Version: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).version }}"
echo "Breaking: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).isBreaking }}"