22 KiB
title, type, status, date, origin
| title | type | status | date | origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| feat(resolve-pr-feedback): cross-invocation cluster analysis | feat | completed | 2026-04-01 | docs/brainstorms/2026-04-01-cross-invocation-cluster-analysis-requirements.md |
Cross-Invocation Cluster Analysis for resolve-pr-feedback
Overview
Replace the dead verify-loop re-entry gate signal in the resolve-pr-feedback skill with a cross-invocation awareness signal that detects recurring feedback patterns across multiple review rounds on the same PR. The change touches three files: the get-pr-comments script (data), the SKILL.md (orchestration), and the pr-comment-resolver agent (cluster handling).
Problem Frame
The skill's cluster analysis has two gates: volume (3+ items) and verify-loop re-entry (2nd+ pass within same invocation). The verify-loop gate is dead — automated reviewers post minutes after push, but verify runs seconds after. This leaves volume as the only gate, which misses the highest-value scenario: a reviewer posts 1-2 threads per round about the same class of problem across multiple rounds. Cross-invocation awareness detects this pattern by checking for resolved threads alongside new ones — evidence of multi-round review. (see origin: docs/brainstorms/2026-04-01-cross-invocation-cluster-analysis-requirements.md)
Requirements Trace
- R1. Cross-invocation awareness signal replaces verify-loop re-entry gate
- R2. Prior resolutions + new feedback = re-entry signal, even with 1 new item
- R3. Volume gate (3+) unchanged, OR'd with cross-invocation signal
- R4. Clustering input includes new + prior threads (bounded to last N)
- R5. Previously-resolved threads participate in category assignment and spatial grouping
- R6. Three-mode resolver assessment: band-aid (redo), correct-but-incomplete (investigate siblings), sound-and-independent (context only)
- R7. Cluster brief gains
<prior-resolutions>element with metadata - R8. Within-session verify loop subsumes into cross-invocation signal
- R9. Zero additional GraphQL calls — broaden existing query's jq filter
- R10. Bounded lookback: last N resolved threads (simplified from "rounds" — see Key Technical Decisions)
Scope Boundaries
- No persistent state files or
.context/storage - No changes to the volume gate threshold or spatial grouping rules
- No changes to standard (non-cluster) thread handling
- No new scripts — extend the existing
get-pr-commentsscript
Context & Research
Relevant Code and Patterns
plugins/compound-engineering/skills/resolve-pr-feedback/SKILL.md— skill orchestration, steps 1-9plugins/compound-engineering/skills/resolve-pr-feedback/scripts/get-pr-comments— GraphQL query + jq filter; already fetches resolved threads in the query but drops them in jq (isResolved == false)plugins/compound-engineering/agents/workflow/pr-comment-resolver.md— resolver agent with standard and cluster modes
Institutional Learnings
- Script-first architecture (
docs/solutions/skill-design/script-first-skill-architecture.md): Classification and filtering logic must live in the script, not in SKILL.md instructions. The script should output pre-computed analysis so the model receives structured decisions, not raw data to classify. 60-75% token savings. - Explicit state machines (
docs/solutions/skill-design/git-workflow-skills-need-explicit-state-machines-2026-03-27.md): Model the cross-invocation gate as a decision table with explicit outcomes, not prose conditionals. - Pass paths, not content (
docs/solutions/skill-design/pass-paths-not-content-to-subagents-2026-03-26.md): The<prior-resolutions>element should contain metadata (thread IDs, categories, file paths, timestamps), not full comment bodies. The resolver reads full content on demand. - Status-gated resolution (
docs/solutions/workflow/todo-status-lifecycle.md): Previously-resolved threads must be enforced at the dispatch boundary — they participate in clustering but are never individually dispatched.
Key Technical Decisions
- jq filter change, not GraphQL change: The existing query fetches all threads including resolved ones. The
isResolved == falsefilter is in jq. Broadening this filter adds resolved threads to the output at zero API cost. (see origin: R9) - Any resolved thread is a prior resolution — no author matching needed: The brainstorm originally required detecting the skill's own prior replies. The plan simplifies this: any resolved thread on the PR is evidence of a prior review round. This eliminates the
gh api usercall,author.loginmatching, reply pattern detection, and theset -eerror handling complexity. Multi-round review is the signal, regardless of who resolved the threads. - N bounds total resolved threads, not "rounds": The brainstorm defined "rounds" as groups of threads resolved in a single invocation, which required fragile timestamp-based clustering in jq. The plan simplifies to: take the last N resolved threads (by
createdAtof the most recent comment). This is a trivial jq sort + limit. N=10 is the starting value (covering typical PR history without excessive data). Successive reviews naturally cluster around changed code, so thread-level bounding is sufficient. - No spatial overlap check: The brainstorm's R11 specified a lightweight overlap check before full clustering. The plan drops this: successive reviews almost always cluster around the same code areas, so the overlap check would almost always pass. The cost it prevents (clustering with ~10 resolved threads + 1-2 new ones) is small. Skipping it keeps the orchestration simpler.
- Script computes the cross-invocation envelope: Per the script-first learning, the script outputs a
cross_invocationobject withsignal(boolean) andresolved_threads(array). The SKILL.md receives pre-computed analysis.
Open Questions
Resolved During Planning
- How to detect prior resolutions: Any resolved thread = prior resolution. No author matching, no reply pattern matching, no user API call. Resolved threads exist alongside new ones in the script output.
- How to bound the lookback: Last N=10 resolved threads by most-recent comment timestamp. Simple jq sort + slice.
- Whether to check spatial overlap first: No. Successive reviews naturally cluster around changed code. The overlap check adds orchestration complexity for negligible token savings.
Deferred to Implementation
- Optimal value of N: Starting at 10. If PRs with extensive resolved thread history show performance issues, reduce. If patterns are missed, increase.
High-Level Technical Design
This illustrates the intended approach and is directional guidance for review, not implementation specification. The implementing agent should treat it as context, not code to reproduce.
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ get-pr-comments script (data layer) │
│ │
│ GraphQL query (unchanged) │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ jq filter (broadened) │
│ │ │
│ ├── review_threads: [unresolved, as before] │
│ ├── pr_comments: [as before] │
│ ├── review_bodies: [as before] │
│ └── cross_invocation: │
│ signal: true/false │
│ resolved_threads: [ │
│ { thread_id, path, line, │
│ first_comment_body, last_comment_at } │
│ ...last N by recency │
│ ] │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SKILL.md (orchestration layer) │
│ │
│ Step 1: Fetch (calls modified script) │
│ │
│ Step 2: Triage (as before) │
│ │
│ Step 3: Cluster gate (CHANGED) │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Volume (3+)? ─── YES ──> full clustering │ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ │ NO │ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ │ cross_invocation.signal? ─ NO ──> skip │ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ │ YES │ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ │ Full clustering (new + resolved threads) │ │
│ └────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Step 5: Dispatch │
│ - resolved threads: cluster input only │
│ - new threads: cluster or individual │
│ │
│ Step 8: Verify loop (simplified) │
│ - removes old verify-loop re-entry logic │
│ - relies on cross-invocation signal next run │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ pr-comment-resolver agent (cluster mode) │
│ │
│ Receives <cluster-brief> with <prior-resolutions> │
│ │
│ Three-mode assessment: │
│ 1. Band-aid: redo prior fixes holistically │
│ 2. Correct-but-incomplete: keep fixes, │
│ investigate sibling code │
│ 3. Sound-and-independent: context only │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Implementation Units
- Unit 1: Extend
get-pr-commentsscript
Goal: Broaden the jq filter to include resolved threads and output a cross-invocation envelope alongside the existing data.
Requirements: R1, R2, R9, R10
Dependencies: None
Files:
- Modify:
plugins/compound-engineering/skills/resolve-pr-feedback/scripts/get-pr-comments
Approach:
- Widen the jq filter: keep the existing
review_threadsarray (unresolved, non-outdated, as before). Add a new selection for resolved threads (isResolved == true), sorted by most-recent commentcreatedAt, limited to the last N=10. - Output the existing three keys (
review_threads,pr_comments,review_bodies) unchanged, plus a newcross_invocationobject containing:signal(boolean — true when both resolved threads and unresolved review threads exist), andresolved_threads(array of objects withthread_id,path,line,first_comment_body,last_comment_at). - No
gh api usercall. No author matching. No reply pattern detection. The signal is simply: resolved threads exist AND new threads exist.
Patterns to follow:
- Existing jq pipeline in
get-pr-comments— extend the$prextraction, don't restructure it - Keep all logic in jq
Test scenarios:
- Happy path: PR with 2 resolved threads and 1 new thread ->
cross_invocation.signal: true,resolved_threadshas 2 entries,review_threadshas 1 - Happy path: PR with no resolved threads ->
cross_invocation.signal: false,resolved_threadsempty - Happy path: PR with resolved threads but no unresolved threads ->
cross_invocation.signal: false(nothing new to cluster) - Edge case: PR with 20 resolved threads -> only last 10 (by recency) included
- Edge case: PR with resolved threads but all unresolved threads are outdated ->
review_threadsempty, signal false
Verification:
- Run against a test PR with known resolved threads and verify the output JSON shape
- Existing
review_threads,pr_comments,review_bodiesoutput is identical to current behavior
- Unit 2: Update SKILL.md orchestration
Goal: Replace the verify-loop re-entry gate with the cross-invocation signal, update cluster brief format, enforce dispatch boundary for resolved threads, and simplify the verify loop.
Requirements: R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R7, R8
Dependencies: Unit 1 (script must output the cross-invocation envelope)
Files:
- Modify:
plugins/compound-engineering/skills/resolve-pr-feedback/SKILL.md
Approach:
Step 1 (Fetch): No change — the script now returns the cross-invocation envelope automatically.
Step 2 (Triage): No changes. Triage classifies new vs already-handled among unresolved threads. Resolved threads from cross_invocation are not triage subjects — they're a separate input to clustering.
Step 3 (Cluster Analysis): Replace the gate table:
| Gate signal | Check |
|---|---|
| Volume | 3+ new items from triage |
| Cross-invocation | cross_invocation.signal == true |
When cross-invocation gate fires: include resolved threads from cross_invocation.resolved_threads alongside new threads in category assignment and spatial grouping. Resolved threads get a previously_resolved marker.
Update cluster brief XML to include <prior-resolutions>:
<cluster-brief>
<theme>[concern category]</theme>
<area>[common directory path]</area>
<files>[comma-separated file paths]</files>
<threads>[comma-separated thread/comment IDs]</threads>
<hypothesis>[one sentence]</hypothesis>
<prior-resolutions>
<thread id="PRRT_..." path="..." category="..."/>
</prior-resolutions>
</cluster-brief>
Remove the <just-fixed-files> element — subsumed by <prior-resolutions>.
Step 5 (Dispatch): Add dispatch boundary rule: resolved threads participate in clustering and appear in cluster briefs, but are NEVER individually dispatched. Only new threads get individual or cluster dispatch.
Step 8 (Verify): Simplify. Remove "Record which files were modified and which concern categories were addressed" and the verify-loop re-entry language. If new threads remain after 2 fix-verify cycles, escalate. Cross-invocation signal handles re-entry across sessions; within-session re-entry works because replies from earlier cycles make threads resolved on re-fetch.
Patterns to follow:
- Existing gate table format in step 3
- Existing cluster brief XML structure
- Existing dispatch boundary logic in step 5
Test scenarios:
- Happy path: 1 new thread + cross-invocation signal -> cluster analysis runs, resolved threads included
- Happy path: 3 new threads + no cross-invocation signal -> volume gate fires, no resolved threads
- Happy path: 1 new thread + no cross-invocation signal -> both gates skip, no clustering
- Edge case: cross-invocation cluster with 1 new + 2 resolved -> brief includes all 3, dispatch only addresses the new thread (plus siblings the resolver identifies)
- Edge case: resolved thread in a cluster -> in the brief for context, NOT dispatched individually
- Integration: verify loop re-fetches after this session's fixes, resolved threads from this cycle appear in
cross_invocation
Verification:
- Gate table in step 3 has exactly two rows (Volume, Cross-invocation)
- No references to "verify-loop re-entry" remain
<just-fixed-files>removed from cluster brief documentation- Step 5 has "resolved threads are cluster-only" rule
- Step 8 no longer tracks files/categories or references re-entry as a gate signal
- Unit 3: Update pr-comment-resolver agent for cross-invocation clusters
Goal: Add handling for the <prior-resolutions> element in cluster mode and implement the three-mode assessment for cross-invocation clusters.
Requirements: R6, R7
Dependencies: Unit 2 (SKILL.md must send the new cluster brief format)
Files:
- Modify:
plugins/compound-engineering/agents/workflow/pr-comment-resolver.md
Approach:
Update the Cluster Mode Workflow section:
Step 1 (Parse cluster brief): Add <prior-resolutions> to parsed elements.
Step 3 (Assess root cause): When <prior-resolutions> is present, expand from two modes (systemic vs coincidental) to three:
- Band-aid fixes — prior fixes addressed symptoms, not root cause. Approach: re-examine prior fix locations, implement holistic fix.
- Correct but incomplete — prior fixes were right for their files, but the recurring pattern likely exists in untouched sibling code. This is the highest-value mode. Approach: keep prior fixes, fix the new thread, proactively investigate files in the same directory/module for the same pattern. Report findings in cluster assessment.
- Sound and independent — prior fixes adequate, new thread is genuinely unrelated. Approach: fix individually, use prior context for awareness only.
Add a cross-invocation example showing the "correct but incomplete" mode.
Update cluster_assessment return to include which mode was applied and, for "correct but incomplete" mode, which additional files were investigated.
Patterns to follow:
- Existing cluster mode workflow structure
- Existing example format in
<examples> - Existing
cluster_assessmentreturn structure
Test scenarios:
- Happy path: cluster with
<prior-resolutions>where pattern extends to untouched code -> "correct but incomplete", investigates siblings - Happy path: cluster with
<prior-resolutions>where prior fixes were shallow -> "band-aid", holistic fix - Happy path: cluster with
<prior-resolutions>where new thread is unrelated -> "sound and independent" - Happy path: cluster WITHOUT
<prior-resolutions>-> existing two-mode assessment, no behavior change - Edge case:
<prior-resolutions>present but empty -> fall back to existing behavior
Verification:
- Cluster mode workflow mentions all three assessment modes
<prior-resolutions>is listed as a parsed element- New example demonstrates "correct but incomplete" mode
cluster_assessmentformat documented for all three modes- References to
<just-fixed-files>removed (subsumed by<prior-resolutions>) - Existing standard mode and non-prior cluster mode unchanged
System-Wide Impact
- Interaction graph:
get-pr-commentsis called by SKILL.md step 1 and step 8 (verify). Both callers now receive thecross_invocationenvelope. Step 8's re-fetch picks up this session's replies as resolved threads. - Error propagation: No new external calls to fail. The only change is a jq filter broadening — if resolved threads are missing from the GraphQL response,
cross_invocation.signalis false (graceful degradation). - API surface parity: The script's existing three output keys are unchanged. Callers that don't read
cross_invocationare unaffected. - Unchanged invariants: Targeted mode is unaffected. Volume gate threshold, spatial grouping rules, and individual dispatch logic are unchanged.
Risks & Dependencies
| Risk | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Resolved threads from manual (non-skill) resolution included as prior resolutions | Acceptable — any resolved thread is evidence of prior review attention. If it was manually resolved without a fix, clustering with it may produce a "sound and independent" assessment, which is the correct outcome |
| Resolved threads with 50+ comments hit pagination limits | Existing query fetches comments(first: 50). The last_comment_at timestamp comes from whatever comments are fetched — graceful degradation |
| "Correct but incomplete" mode causes resolver to touch files not in review threads | Bounded by the cluster's <area> (directory path). Resolver already reads broadly in cluster mode |
| Within-session verify loop depends on GitHub API reflecting resolved state quickly | GitHub's GraphQL is eventually consistent. If a just-resolved thread hasn't propagated, the cross-invocation signal won't fire for that thread on re-fetch — it will be caught on the next invocation instead. Acceptable degradation |
Sources & References
- Origin document: docs/brainstorms/2026-04-01-cross-invocation-cluster-analysis-requirements.md
- Related skill:
plugins/compound-engineering/skills/resolve-pr-feedback/SKILL.md - Related agent:
plugins/compound-engineering/agents/workflow/pr-comment-resolver.md - Related script:
plugins/compound-engineering/skills/resolve-pr-feedback/scripts/get-pr-comments - Learnings:
docs/solutions/skill-design/script-first-skill-architecture.md,docs/solutions/skill-design/git-workflow-skills-need-explicit-state-machines-2026-03-27.md