Skill v1.1.0

currentAutomated scan94/100

nousresearch/hermes-agent/github-code-review

+4 new

──Details

PublishedAugust 28, 2026 at 07:03 AM

Content Hashsha256:957c4d454ca71d7d...

Git SHA01740f352e2f

Bump Typepatch

Compare with v1.0.0

──Files

Files (1 file, 13.3 KB)

SKILL.md13.3 KBactive

SKILL.md · 482 lines · 13.3 KB

name: github-code-review description: "Review PRs: diffs, inline comments via gh or REST." version: 1.1.0 author: Hermes Agent license: MIT platforms: [linux, macos, windows] metadata: hermes: tags: [GitHub, Code-Review, Pull-Requests, Git, Quality] related_skills: [github-auth, github-pr-workflow]

GitHub Code Review

Perform code reviews on local changes before pushing, or review open PRs on GitHub. Most of this skill uses plain git — the gh/curl split only matters for PR-level interactions.

Prerequisites

Authenticated with GitHub (see github-auth skill)
Inside a git repository

Setup (for PR interactions)

bash

if command -v gh &>/dev/null && gh auth status &>/dev/null; then
  AUTH="gh"
else
  AUTH="git"
  if [ -z "$GITHUB_TOKEN" ]; then
    if _hermes_env="${HERMES_HOME:-$HOME/.hermes}/.env"; [ -f "$_hermes_env" ] && grep -q "^GITHUB_TOKEN=" "$_hermes_env"; then
      GITHUB_TOKEN=$(grep "^GITHUB_TOKEN=" "$_hermes_env" | head -1 | cut -d= -f2 | tr -d '\n\r')
    elif grep -q "github.com" ~/.git-credentials 2>/dev/null; then
      GITHUB_TOKEN=$(uv run python "${HERMES_HOME:-$HOME/.hermes}/skills/github/github-auth/scripts/git-credential-token.py")
    fi
  fi
fi
 
REMOTE_URL=$(git remote get-url origin)
OWNER_REPO=$(echo "$REMOTE_URL" | sed -E 's|.*github\.com[:/]||; s|\.git$||')
OWNER=$(echo "$OWNER_REPO" | cut -d/ -f1)
REPO=$(echo "$OWNER_REPO" | cut -d/ -f2)

1. Reviewing Local Changes (Pre-Push)

This is pure git — works everywhere, no API needed.

Get the Diff

bash

# Staged changes (what would be committed)
git diff --staged
 
# All changes vs main (what a PR would contain)
git diff main...HEAD
 
# File names only
git diff main...HEAD --name-only
 
# Stat summary (insertions/deletions per file)
git diff main...HEAD --stat

Review Strategy

Get the big picture first:

bash

git diff main...HEAD --stat
git log main..HEAD --oneline

Review file by file — use read_file on changed files for full context, and the diff to see what changed:

bash

git diff main...HEAD -- src/auth/login.py

Check for common issues:

bash

# Debug statements, TODOs, console.logs left behind
git diff main...HEAD | grep -n "print(\|console\.log\|TODO\|FIXME\|HACK\|XXX\|debugger"
 
# Large files accidentally staged
git diff main...HEAD --stat | sort -t'|' -k2 -rn | head -10
 
# Secrets or credential patterns
git diff main...HEAD | grep -in "password\|secret\|api_key\|token.*=\|private_key"
 
# Merge conflict markers
git diff main...HEAD | grep -n "<<<<<<\|>>>>>>\|======="

Present structured feedback to the user.

Review Output Format

When reviewing local changes, present findings in this structure:

## Code Review Summary
 
### Critical
- **src/auth.py:45** — SQL injection: user input passed directly to query.
  Suggestion: Use parameterized queries.
 
### Warnings
- **src/models/user.py:23** — Password stored in plaintext. Use bcrypt or argon2.
- **src/api/routes.py:112** — No rate limiting on login endpoint.
 
### Suggestions
- **src/utils/helpers.py:8** — Duplicates logic in `src/core/utils.py:34`. Consolidate.
- **tests/test_auth.py** — Missing edge case: expired token test.
 
### Looks Good
- Clean separation of concerns in the middleware layer
- Good test coverage for the happy path

2. Reviewing a Pull Request on GitHub

View PR Details

With gh:

bash

gh pr view 123
gh pr diff 123
gh pr diff 123 --name-only

With git + curl:

bash

PR_NUMBER=123
 
# Get PR details
curl -s \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER \
  | python -c "
import sys, json
pr = json.load(sys.stdin)
print(f\"Title: {pr['title']}\")
print(f\"Author: {pr['user']['login']}\")
print(f\"Branch: {pr['head']['ref']} -> {pr['base']['ref']}\")
print(f\"State: {pr['state']}\")
print(f\"Body:\n{pr['body']}\")"
 
# List changed files
curl -s \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/files \
  | python -c "
import sys, json
for f in json.load(sys.stdin):
    print(f\"{f['status']:10} +{f['additions']:-4} -{f['deletions']:-4}  {f['filename']}\")"

Check Out PR Locally for Full Review

This works with plain git — no gh needed:

bash

# Fetch the PR branch and check it out
git fetch origin pull/123/head:pr-123
git checkout pr-123
 
# Now you can use read_file, search_files, run tests, etc.
 
# View diff against the base branch
git diff main...pr-123

With gh (shortcut):

bash

gh pr checkout 123

Leave Comments on a PR

General PR comment — with gh:

bash

gh pr comment 123 --body "Overall looks good, a few suggestions below."

General PR comment — with curl:

bash

curl -s -X POST \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/issues/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
  -d '{"body": "Overall looks good, a few suggestions below."}'

Leave Inline Review Comments

Single inline comment — with gh (via API):

bash

HEAD_SHA=$(gh pr view 123 --json headRefOid --jq '.headRefOid')
 
gh api repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/123/comments \
  --method POST \
  -f body="This could be simplified with a list comprehension." \
  -f path="src/auth/login.py" \
  -f commit_id="$HEAD_SHA" \
  -f line=45 \
  -f side="RIGHT"

Single inline comment — with curl:

bash

# Get the head commit SHA
HEAD_SHA=$(curl -s \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER \
  | python -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['head']['sha'])")
 
curl -s -X POST \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/comments \
  -d "{
    \"body\": \"This could be simplified with a list comprehension.\",
    \"path\": \"src/auth/login.py\",
    \"commit_id\": \"$HEAD_SHA\",
    \"line\": 45,
    \"side\": \"RIGHT\"
  }"

Submit a Formal Review (Approve / Request Changes)

With gh:

bash

gh pr review 123 --approve --body "LGTM!"
gh pr review 123 --request-changes --body "See inline comments."
gh pr review 123 --comment --body "Some suggestions, nothing blocking."

With curl — multi-comment review submitted atomically:

bash

HEAD_SHA=$(curl -s \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER \
  | python -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['head']['sha'])")
 
curl -s -X POST \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/reviews \
  -d "{
    \"commit_id\": \"$HEAD_SHA\",
    \"event\": \"COMMENT\",
    \"body\": \"Code review from Hermes Agent\",
    \"comments\": [
      {\"path\": \"src/auth.py\", \"line\": 45, \"body\": \"Use parameterized queries to prevent SQL injection.\"},
      {\"path\": \"src/models/user.py\", \"line\": 23, \"body\": \"Hash passwords with bcrypt before storing.\"},
      {\"path\": \"tests/test_auth.py\", \"line\": 1, \"body\": \"Add test for expired token edge case.\"}
    ]
  }"

Event values: "APPROVE", "REQUEST_CHANGES", "COMMENT"

The line field refers to the line number in the new version of the file. For deleted lines, use "side": "LEFT".

3. Review Checklist

When performing a code review (local or PR), systematically check:

Correctness

Does the code do what it claims?
Edge cases handled (empty inputs, nulls, large data, concurrent access)?
Error paths handled gracefully?

Security

No hardcoded secrets, credentials, or API keys
Input validation on user-facing inputs
No SQL injection, XSS, or path traversal
Auth/authz checks where needed

Code Quality

Clear naming (variables, functions, classes)
No unnecessary complexity or premature abstraction
DRY — no duplicated logic that should be extracted
Functions are focused (single responsibility)

Testing

New code paths tested?
Happy path and error cases covered?
Tests readable and maintainable?

Performance

No N+1 queries or unnecessary loops
Appropriate caching where beneficial
No blocking operations in async code paths

Documentation

Public APIs documented
Non-obvious logic has comments explaining "why"
README updated if behavior changed

4. Pre-Push Review Workflow

When the user asks you to "review the code" or "check before pushing":

git diff main...HEAD --stat — see scope of changes
git diff main...HEAD — read the full diff
For each changed file, use read_file if you need more context
Apply the checklist above
Present findings in the structured format (Critical / Warnings / Suggestions / Looks Good)
If critical issues found, offer to fix them before the user pushes

5. PR Review Workflow (End-to-End)

When the user asks you to "review PR #N", "look at this PR", or gives you a PR URL, follow this recipe:

Step 1: Set up environment

bash

source "${HERMES_HOME:-$HOME/.hermes}/skills/github/github-auth/scripts/gh-env.sh"
# Or run the inline setup block from the top of this skill

Step 2: Gather PR context

Get the PR metadata, description, and list of changed files to understand scope before diving into code.

With gh:

bash

gh pr view 123
gh pr diff 123 --name-only
gh pr checks 123

With curl:

bash

PR_NUMBER=123
 
# PR details (title, author, description, branch)
curl -s -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$GH_OWNER/$GH_REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER
 
# Changed files with line counts
curl -s -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$GH_OWNER/$GH_REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/files

Step 3: Check out the PR locally

This gives you full access to read_file, search_files, and the ability to run tests.

bash

git fetch origin pull/$PR_NUMBER/head:pr-$PR_NUMBER
git checkout pr-$PR_NUMBER

Step 4: Read the diff and understand changes

bash

# Full diff against the base branch
git diff main...HEAD
 
# Or file-by-file for large PRs
git diff main...HEAD --name-only
# Then for each file:
git diff main...HEAD -- path/to/file.py

For each changed file, use read_file to see full context around the changes — diffs alone can miss issues visible only with surrounding code.

Step 5: Run automated checks locally (if applicable)

bash

# Run tests if there's a test suite
python -m pytest 2>&1 | tail -20
# or: npm test, cargo test, go test ./..., etc.
 
# Run linter if configured
ruff check . 2>&1 | head -30
# or: eslint, clippy, etc.

Step 6: Apply the review checklist (Section 3)

Go through each category: Correctness, Security, Code Quality, Testing, Performance, Documentation.

Step 7: Post the review to GitHub

Collect your findings and submit them as a formal review with inline comments.

With gh:

bash

# If no issues — approve
gh pr review $PR_NUMBER --approve --body "Reviewed by Hermes Agent. Code looks clean — good test coverage, no security concerns."
 
# If issues found — request changes with inline comments
gh pr review $PR_NUMBER --request-changes --body "Found a few issues — see inline comments."

With curl — atomic review with multiple inline comments:

bash

HEAD_SHA=$(curl -s -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$GH_OWNER/$GH_REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER \
  | python -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['head']['sha'])")
 
# Build the review JSON — event is APPROVE, REQUEST_CHANGES, or COMMENT
curl -s -X POST \
  -H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/$GH_OWNER/$GH_REPO/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/reviews \
  -d "{
    \"commit_id\": \"$HEAD_SHA\",
    \"event\": \"REQUEST_CHANGES\",
    \"body\": \"## Hermes Agent Review\n\nFound 2 issues, 1 suggestion. See inline comments.\",
    \"comments\": [
      {\"path\": \"src/auth.py\", \"line\": 45, \"body\": \"🔴 **Critical:** User input passed directly to SQL query — use parameterized queries.\"},
      {\"path\": \"src/models.py\", \"line\": 23, \"body\": \"⚠️ **Warning:** Password stored without hashing.\"},
      {\"path\": \"src/utils.py\", \"line\": 8, \"body\": \"💡 **Suggestion:** This duplicates logic in core/utils.py:34.\"}
    ]
  }"

Step 8: Also post a summary comment

In addition to inline comments, leave a top-level summary so the PR author gets the full picture at a glance. Use the review output format from references/review-output-template.md.

With gh:

bash

gh pr comment $PR_NUMBER --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Code Review Summary
 
**Verdict: Changes Requested** (2 issues, 1 suggestion)
 
### 🔴 Critical
- **src/auth.py:45** — SQL injection vulnerability
 
### ⚠️ Warnings
- **src/models.py:23** — Plaintext password storage
 
### 💡 Suggestions
- **src/utils.py:8** — Duplicated logic, consider consolidating
 
### ✅ Looks Good
- Clean API design
- Good error handling in the middleware layer
 
---
*Reviewed by Hermes Agent*
EOF
)"

Step 9: Clean up

bash

git checkout main
git branch -D pr-$PR_NUMBER

Decision: Approve vs Request Changes vs Comment

Approve — no critical or warning-level issues, only minor suggestions or all clear
Request Changes — any critical or warning-level issue that should be fixed before merge
Comment — observations and suggestions, but nothing blocking (use when you're unsure or the PR is a draft)

← v1.0.0 All versions