Skill v1.0.1

currentAutomated scan100/100

moaidhathot/neovim-moaid/creating-review-actionview-entry

+1 new

──Details

PublishedJuly 29, 2026 at 03:07 PM

Content Hashsha256:8471d57c10e60bed...

Git SHAd7a95f38bda8

Bump Typepatch

Compare with v1.0.0

──Files

Files (1 file, 18.1 KB)

SKILL.md18.1 KBactive

SKILL.md · 493 lines · 18.1 KB

version: "1.0.1" name: creating-review-actionview-entry description: Creates an ActionView entry of type 'pr-review-summary' from PowerReview draft comments/replies and consolidated review data. Produces a structured JSON entry with PR metadata, per-draft details (reviewer name, file/thread, severity, code diff when available), per-draft approve/delete actions, and entry-level bulk actions (approve all, submit, vote, delete all). Use after all PR reviewers have finished creating their draft comments or follow-up replies and the consolidated review is available. compatibility: Requires the PowerReview MCP server connected via stdio. Requires the ActionView entry schema (fetched at runtime or embedded). Requires a completed review with drafts in the PowerReview session.

Creating a PR Review ActionView Entry

This skill tells you how to build an ActionView entry of type pr-review-summary from PowerReview review data. The entry is a structured JSON object that the user views in the ActionView dashboard to review, approve, and submit AI-generated PR comments.

When to use this skill

Use this skill in the create-action-view-entry step of a PR review orchestration, after:

All reviewer agents have finished creating draft comments and/or draft replies via PowerReview
The consolidated review summary is available

Prerequisites

A PowerReview session is open for the PR
The PR URL (prUrl) is known
The consolidated review JSON is available (from the consolidation step)
The ActionView entry schema is available (fetched via actionview schema or provided)

Data collection

Before building the entry, you must collect data from PowerReview. The consolidated review gives you summary-level data, but you also need the individual drafts for per-comment/per-reply sections and action buttons.

Step 1: Get PR metadata

Call GetReviewSession(prUrl) to get:

json

{
  "pull_request": {
    "id": 42,
    "title": "Add input validation",
    "url": "https://dev.azure.com/org/project/_git/repo/pullrequest/42",
    "source_branch": "feature/validation",
    "target_branch": "main",
    "author": { "name": "John Doe" }
  },
  "files": [
    { "path": "src/main.cs", "change_type": "Edit" }
  ]
}

Step 2: Get all draft comments and replies

Call ListCommentThreads(prUrl) to get all threads and drafts. The response includes a drafts array. A draft can be a file comment or a reply linked to an existing thread by draft.thread_id:

json

{
  "drafts": [
    {
      "id": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000",
      "draft": {
        "file_path": "src/main.cs",
        "line_start": 42,
        "line_end": 45,
        "body": "bug: Null reference possible here when `user` is not found.",
        "status": "Draft",
        "author": "Ai",
        "author_name": ".NET Expert",
        "created_at": "2026-04-13T10:00:00Z"
      }
    }
  ]
}

Key fields for each draft:

id -- the draft UUID, needed for per-comment action commands
draft.file_path -- the file this comment/reply is on, when available
draft.thread_id -- the parent thread for a draft reply, when available
draft.line_start / draft.line_end -- line range, when available
draft.body -- the draft text
draft.author_name -- which reviewer agent wrote this (e.g. ".NET Expert", "Security Expert")

For draft replies, find the parent thread by thread_id and use that thread's file path, line range, status, and recent comments for context.

Step 3: Get code diffs for commented files

For each unique file that has draft comments or thread-linked draft replies, call GetFileDiff(prUrl, filePath) to get the unified diff when helpful. You'll use this to show code context next to each draft.

You don't need the full file diff for every file -- only for files that have draft comments or draft replies tied to file-level threads.

Building the entry

Entry-level fields

json

{
  "schemaVersion": "1",
  "type": "pr-review-summary",
  "source": "<orchestration name>",
  "title": "PR Review: <PR title>",
  "subtitle": "<overall status> | <total comments> comments",
  "severity": "<mapped from overall status>",
  "icon": "git-pull-request",
  "tags": ["pr-review", "code-review", "ZTS", "<overall status>"]
}

Severity mapping:

needs-work or has critical issues -> "high"
approved-with-suggestions -> "medium"
approved -> "low"

Content blocks (in order)

1. Alert (optional)

Only include if there are critical or blocking issues:

json

{
  "type": "alert",
  "level": "error",
  "body": "This PR has <N> critical issues that must be addressed before merging."
}

2. PR metadata (keyValue)

json

{
  "type": "keyValue",
  "label": "Pull Request",
  "pairs": {
    "Repository": "<org>/<project>/<repo>",
    "Branch": "<source_branch> -> <target_branch>",
    "Author": "<author name>",
    "Files Changed": "<count>",
    "Lines": "+<added> / -<removed>"
  }
}

3. Review Summary table

One row per reviewer agent, from the consolidated review's reviewerSummaries:

json

{
  "type": "table",
  "label": "Review Summary",
  "columns": ["Reviewer", "Status", "Comments", "Critical Issues"],
  "rows": [
    [".NET Expert", "approved-with-suggestions", "3", "0"],
    ["Principal Engineer", "approved", "1", "0"],
    ["Security Expert", "needs-work", "2", "1"],
    ["DTFx Expert", "approved", "0", "0"]
  ]
}

4. Review Comments section (required -- one nested section per draft comment or draft reply)

This is the most important section. Each draft comment or draft reply becomes a nested section with:

a) keyValue "Details" -- comment metadata:

json

{
  "type": "keyValue",
  "label": "Details",
  "pairs": {
    "Reviewer": "<draft.author_name, e.g. '.NET Expert'>",
    "File": "<draft.file_path or parent thread file_path>",
    "Lines": "<draft.line_start-line_end or parent thread line_start-line_end>",
    "Thread ID": "<draft.thread_id if this is a reply>",
    "Draft Type": "comment|reply",
    "Severity": "<extracted from body prefix: nit/suggestion/bug/critical>",
    "Draft ID": "<draft UUID>"
  }
}

To extract severity: check if the draft body starts with nit:, suggestion:, bug:, or critical:. If no prefix, use "info".

b) markdown "Comment" -- the draft text. Make it editable and give it a stable id equal to the draft UUID so the user can revise the comment in the dashboard before approving, and the edit can be pushed back to PowerReview:

json

{
  "type": "markdown",
  "label": "Comment",
  "id": "<draft UUID>",
  "editable": true,
  "body": "<draft.body>"
}

editable: true renders an inline editor (pencil) on the block; edits persist to the entry and can be reverted.
id: "<draft UUID>" lets the per-comment "Save Edit" action reference the block's current text via {{content.<draft UUID>}} (see the actions below).

c) code "Code" (optional) -- the relevant code diff:

json

{
  "type": "code",
  "label": "Code",
  "language": "diff",
  "filename": "<draft.file_path>",
  "body": "<relevant portion of the file diff around the commented lines>"
}

Extract the relevant hunk from the full file diff that covers the commented/replied thread line range. If the diff is short enough, you can include the entire file diff. Use language: "diff" for unified diff format, or use the file's language (e.g., "csharp") if showing the raw code instead of a diff.

d) Per-comment actions:

Give each comment a Save Edit, Approve, and Delete action. "Save Edit" pushes the user's inline edit of the "Comment" block back to PowerReview using a {{content.<draft UUID>}} reference — ActionView expands it to the block's current (edited) text at execution time and passes it as a single argument, so multi-line markdown with quotes is safe.

json

{
  "actions": [
    {
      "label": "Save Edit",
      "style": "primary",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "edit", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>", "--draft-id", "<draft UUID>", "--body", "{{content.<draft UUID>}}"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Approve",
      "style": "success",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "approve", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>", "--draft-id", "<draft UUID>"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Delete",
      "style": "danger",
      "confirmMessage": "Delete this draft comment?",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "delete", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>", "--draft-id", "<draft UUID>"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    }
  ]
}

The `{{content.<draft UUID>}}` in "Save Edit" must match the `id` you set on the "Comment" markdown block. Because the action lives on the section (not the markdown block), you cannot use {{content.self}} here — that would resolve to the section, not the comment. Reference the block by its id.
Editing resets approval. Per PowerReview, editing a draft that was already Pending returns it to Draft status, so the natural order is edit → Save Edit → Approve. "Save Edit" is optional — only needed when the user actually changed the text.

Put it all together -- a complete nested section for one draft:

json

{
  "type": "section",
  "title": "<file_path>:<line_start> - <severity prefix or first ~50 chars of body>",
  "content": [
    {
      "type": "keyValue",
      "label": "Details",
      "pairs": {
        "Reviewer": ".NET Expert",
        "File": "src/main.cs",
        "Lines": "42-45",
        "Severity": "bug",
        "Draft ID": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000"
      }
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "label": "Comment",
      "id": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000",
      "editable": true,
      "body": "bug: Null reference possible here when `user` is not found."
    },
    {
      "type": "code",
      "label": "Code",
      "language": "diff",
      "filename": "src/main.cs",
      "body": "@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@\n     var user = await _repo.FindAsync(id);\n-    return user.Name;\n+    return user.Name; // potential NullReferenceException"
    }
  ],
  "actions": [
    {
      "label": "Save Edit",
      "style": "primary",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "edit", "--pr-url", "https://dev.azure.com/org/project/_git/repo/pullrequest/42", "--draft-id", "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000", "--body", "{{content.550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000}}"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Approve",
      "style": "success",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "approve", "--pr-url", "https://dev.azure.com/org/project/_git/repo/pullrequest/42", "--draft-id", "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Delete",
      "style": "danger",
      "confirmMessage": "Delete this draft comment?",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "delete", "--pr-url", "https://dev.azure.com/org/project/_git/repo/pullrequest/42", "--draft-id", "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    }
  ]
}

Repeat this for every draft comment or reply in the session.

5-11. Expert sections (optional)

These sections are optional and provide a per-reviewer breakdown. They can contain markdown summaries from the consolidated review. Include them if the consolidated review provides per-reviewer narrative findings beyond what's in the individual comments.

"Critical & Blocking Issues"
".NET Expert Findings"
"Architecture & Design"
"Security Findings"
"Durable Tasks Review"
"Test Coverage Assessment"
"Requirements Alignment"

12. Full Review Report (optional)

json

{
  "type": "markdown",
  "label": "Full Review Report",
  "body": "<executive summary from consolidated review>"
}

13. View PR link

json

{
  "type": "link",
  "label": "View PR",
  "url": "<PR URL>",
  "body": "Open pull request in browser"
}

Entry-level actions

These are the buttons at the top/bottom of the entry:

json

{
  "actions": [
    {
      "label": "Open PR",
      "style": "primary",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "pwsh",
        "args": ["-NoProfile", "-Command", "Start-Process '<prUrl>'"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Approve All",
      "style": "success",
      "confirmMessage": "Approve all draft comments?",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "approve-all", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Submit Review",
      "style": "success",
      "confirmMessage": "Submit all pending comments to Azure DevOps?",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["submit", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "archive"
    },
    {
      "label": "Approve PR",
      "style": "success",
      "confirmMessage": "Cast an 'Approved' vote on this PR?",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["vote", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>", "--value", "approve"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Wait for Author",
      "style": "default",
      "confirmMessage": "Cast a 'Wait for Author' vote on this PR?",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["vote", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>", "--value", "wait-for-author"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "keep"
    },
    {
      "label": "Delete All",
      "style": "danger",
      "confirmMessage": "Delete ALL AI-authored draft comments? This cannot be undone.",
      "command": {
        "type": "cli",
        "program": "powerreview",
        "args": ["comment", "delete-all", "--pr-url", "<prUrl>", "--author", "ai"]
      },
      "onSuccess": "archive"
    }
  ]
}

Data mapping reference

PowerReview Source	ActionView Target
`session.pull_request.title`	Entry `title`: `"PR Review: <title>"`
`session.pull_request.url`	"Open PR" action URL, "View PR" link URL, all action `--pr-url` args
`session.pull_request.source_branch` / `target_branch`	"Pull Request" keyValue `Branch`
`session.pull_request.author.name`	"Pull Request" keyValue `Author`
`session.files.length`	"Pull Request" keyValue `Files Changed`
`consolidated.overallStatus`	Entry `subtitle`, `severity`, `tags`
`consolidated.totalComments`	Entry `subtitle`
`consolidated.totalCriticalIssues`	Alert block (if > 0)
`consolidated.reviewerSummaries`	"Review Summary" table rows
`consolidated.executiveSummary`	"Full Review Report" markdown body
`consolidated.crossCuttingConcerns`	Expert sections content
`consolidated.requirementsAlignment`	"Requirements Alignment" section
`draft.id` (UUID)	Per-comment `--draft-id` in Save Edit/Approve/Delete actions; the `id` on the "Comment" markdown block; the `{{content.<id>}}` body reference in "Save Edit"
`draft.author_name`	Per-comment "Details" keyValue `Reviewer`
`draft.file_path` or parent thread `file_path`	Per-comment "Details" keyValue `File`, nested section `title`
`draft.line_start` / `line_end` or parent thread line range	Per-comment "Details" keyValue `Lines`
`draft.thread_id`	Per-comment "Details" keyValue `Thread ID` for replies
`draft.body` prefix	Per-comment "Details" keyValue `Severity`
`draft.body`	Per-comment "Comment" markdown body (`editable: true`, `id` = draft UUID)
`fileDiff.diff` (hunk)	Per-comment "Code" block body

Checklist

Before saving the entry, verify:

Entry Checklist:
- [ ] type is "pr-review-summary"
- [ ] source is the orchestration name
- [ ] title includes the PR title
- [ ] severity is mapped from overall status
- [ ] PR metadata keyValue block is present
- [ ] Review Summary table has one row per reviewer
- [ ] Every draft comment or draft reply has its own nested section
- [ ] Every nested section has Details (keyValue), Comment (markdown), and optionally Code
- [ ] The "Comment" markdown block has `editable: true` and `id` = the draft UUID
- [ ] Every nested section has Save Edit, Approve, and Delete actions with the correct draft UUID
- [ ] The Save Edit action's `--body` uses `{{content.<draft UUID>}}` matching the Comment block's `id`
- [ ] All action commands use the correct prUrl
- [ ] Entry-level actions include: Open PR, Approve All, Submit Review, Approve PR, Wait for Author, Delete All
- [ ] View PR link is present with the correct URL

Important notes

Draft IDs are critical. Without them, the per-comment Save Edit/Approve/Delete buttons won't work. Make sure every draft comment or reply UUID is included in the "Details" keyValue, the id of the "Comment" markdown block, the --draft-id of each action, and the {{content.<draft UUID>}} reference in the Save Edit action.
Comment editing. The "Comment" block is editable: true so the user can revise an AI-drafted comment in the dashboard. "Save Edit" pushes that edit back to PowerReview via powerreview comment edit --body {{content.<draft UUID>}} (ActionView expands the reference to the block's current text and passes it as one safe argument). Because the action is on the section, reference the block by id — not {{content.self}}. Editing an already-approved (Pending) draft returns it to Draft, so the user re-clicks Approve after saving.
The `author_name` field on drafts identifies which reviewer agent created the comment or reply. If reviewer agents don't pass agentName when creating drafts, this field will be null. Make sure the orchestration's reviewer prompts include agentName.
Code diffs are optional but valuable. If fetching per-file diffs is too expensive, the entry still works without them -- the user can read the comment text and navigate to the file manually.
Save the entry using `orchestra_save_file`. The orchestration's next step will submit it to ActionView via actionview add --file <path>.

← v1.0.0 All versions