Skip to content

ci: optimize Claude review workflow — enforce skills, reduce token waste#724

Merged
lklimek merged 1 commit into
v1.0-devfrom
fix/ci-review-allowedtools
Mar 10, 2026
Merged

ci: optimize Claude review workflow — enforce skills, reduce token waste#724
lklimek merged 1 commit into
v1.0-devfrom
fix/ci-review-allowedtools

Conversation

@lklimek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lklimek lklimek commented Mar 10, 2026

Summary

Fixes three issues observed in the CI review run for PR #719 (log analysis):

  • Remove MCP probe step — the 6-line get_me probe was never actually called (Claude used ToolSearch instead, giving a false positive). Replaced with a single line: "Use MCP tools, fall back to gh CLI on failure."
  • Remove unconditional dash-platform skill load — was injecting ~1,500 tokens/turn of Platform SDK docs regardless of PR content. UI/wallet PRs don't need it.
  • Enforce Skill tool invocation for check-pr-comments and grumpy-review — Claude was ignoring the skill instructions and doing freestyle reviews inline. Now uses explicit Skill(skill="...") syntax with "do NOT skip" enforcement.

Context

Analysis of PR #719 review run showed:

  • 24 turns, $1.30 cost, 3m 37s wall clock
  • ~13s wasted on false-positive MCP probe → denial → gh CLI fallback
  • ~36K tokens wasted on irrelevant Platform SDK context
  • Neither check-pr-comments nor grumpy-review skills were invoked despite prompt instructions

Test plan

  • Trigger a review on a simple PR — verify check-pr-comments and grumpy-review skills are actually invoked (visible in log output as Skill tool calls)
  • Verify MCP tools work without the probe step (should succeed directly with mcp__plugin_claudius_github in allowedTools from build: fix github mcp access denied #722)
  • Verify dash-platform skill is NOT loaded for non-Platform PRs

🤖 Co-authored by Claudius the Magnificent AI Agent

- Remove MCP probe step — use MCP directly, fall back to gh CLI on failure
- Remove unconditional dash-platform skill load (saves ~1500 tokens/turn)
- Enforce Skill tool invocation for check-pr-comments and grumpy-review
  (Claude was skipping them and doing freestyle reviews)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

coderabbitai Bot commented Mar 10, 2026

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@lklimek has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 11 minutes and 52 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 4502b40c-dcbe-43a7-9ef9-987ce737f973

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between caff13f and 699944c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/claude-code-review.yml
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch fix/ci-review-allowedtools

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@lklimek lklimek marked this pull request as ready for review March 10, 2026 19:20
@lklimek lklimek merged commit ab88507 into v1.0-dev Mar 10, 2026
1 check passed
@lklimek lklimek deleted the fix/ci-review-allowedtools branch March 10, 2026 19:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant