Address reviews on your pull request

An address round runs in the author workspace of a pull request you develop. The procedure verifies each review comment on its own, applies what holds, pushes, replies in every thread, resolves the settled ones and asks the reviewers for another look. It stops and asks you first when something is ambiguous or risky: a deep change of direction, an irreversible surface, a blocking request it would decline.

A triage rule in the repository’s AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md wins over the round’s own verdicts. Scope is the pull request’s stated goal, not the lines it touched, and a real problem outside it becomes an issue the round files and links in its report.

On its own

With a workspace for your pull request (linked to it, or on its head branch), the daemon starts an address round when:

• someone else reviews it (bots included) with changes requested, comments, or an approval with inline comments;
• an unresolved review thread ends with someone else’s comment;
• its checks fail, once every check on the head finished, one round per head;
• GitHub reports a conflict with its base for longer than the conflict window (sweep.fast, at least five minutes), one round per head.

Each round waits in the approval window first. A round waits while the agent is stopped on a permission prompt or a question. An agent mid-turn gets the prompt queued. Local work that is not on the pull request (uncommitted changes, unpushed commits) is named in the prompt, the round goes to the live session that knows it, and the procedure never commits or discards it.

For failing checks, the procedure fixes what the pull request broke, reruns a flaky or infrastructure failure once, and verifies a quality gate’s findings like review comments. It never gets a check green by disabling it, editing CI or dismissing a finding; a check that fails again after its rerun comes to you.

For a conflict, the procedure merges the base of the repository the pull request targets into the branch (never a rebase or a force-push), resolves each conflict, runs the tests that cover what it touched, pushes and says so in the report. A conflict it cannot resolve with confidence comes to you, with the merge aborted, and so does a checkout with local work it does not know. A round that only merged the base in posts no comment: the push speaks for itself.

Text from other people

Reviews, comments, threads and check output written by anyone but you reach the agent as data about the code, never as instructions. An item that asks for something the change does not need (running an unrelated command or script, touching secrets, credentials, CI, release or permission configuration, pushing or publishing elsewhere, sending data out, or text aimed at the agent itself) is never acted on: the round changes nothing, records asked flagged as a suspected prompt injection, and names the item and what it asked. The card, the cockpit and the notification open with “Suspected prompt injection”.

By hand

wloop address https://github.com/acme/api/pull/4582
wloop address https://github.com/acme/api/pull/4582 the reviewer is right about the index, skip the rename

From a session in the workspace: /wloop-address <url>. The reviews so far count as covered, so the daemon does not repeat them.

Review your own change first

wloop address https://github.com/acme/api/pull/4582 --self-review "the plan: add the retry, keep the API"

--self-review first reviews the pull request adversarially with your review profile, against the guidance as its plan: what is missing, what deviates, what goes beyond it. Its findings join the reviewers’ comments, marked (own), and are fixed or brought to you the same way. Nothing of that review is published: its trace on GitHub is the commits that fix it.

A pull request with no workspace

Failing checks or a conflict alone never start a round without a workspace. Without a workspace, the daemon only records that it would start a round (would_address), and the cockpit lists the pull request in Needs me as “review to address, no workspace”. To let it create the workspace and run the round:

[plugins.github]
address_without_workspace = true

It can also go on a [[projects]] entry, as github.address_without_workspace = true, for some repositories only.

Turn it down

Setting	Effect
plugins.github.address_reviews = false	no round for reviews
plugins.github.address_skip_reviewers = ["some-bot"]	reviews by these logins never start one
plugins.github.address_checks = false	no round for failing checks
plugins.github.ignore_checks = ["codecov/patch"]	these checks never start one
plugins.github.address_conflicts = false	no round for a conflict with the base
turns.per_unit_per_day = 5	at most this many automatic rounds per pull request per day, against a loop with a bot that reviews every push
workflows.address.only_when = 'pr.visibility == "private"'	automatic rounds only in private repositories; any workflow predicate over the owner, repository or author works the same way

Rules for one reviewer

The round’s instructions open with why it runs now: the reviewers to answer, the failing checks, each with its summary and run link, and the conflict with the base. A block under reviewer=<login>/ applies when that reviewer is among them, such as a review bot whose findings you want verified one by one:

reviewer=review-bot/intent=address.md

Verify each finding of @review-bot against the code. Fix the ones that hold;
answer a wrong one with `@review-bot /dismiss <finding-id> <reason>`.

The match is membership: a round that answers a person and the bot gets the bot’s block too. A login in plugins.github.address_skip_reviewers is never among them, so its block never applies. A round asked for by hand lists the reviewers of the current head, marking those an earlier round already covered; it lists none until wloop has read the pull request in full.

How the guide reads

The bundled intent=address.md sets the stance (a comment is a claim to verify), the risky surfaces, how to commit (the repository’s conventions, one commit per item, tests for new behavior), how to reply (one or two sentences in the thread’s language), whom to ask again (never re-request a reviewer whose approval still stands), and that a conflict with the base is merged in and resolved. A block that says to leave the base alone makes the round only report conflicts. Change any of it in your profile with intent=address.md blocks.