## Why
The PR babysitter could surface inline comments from a GitHub review
that was still in the `PENDING` state. That allowed Codex to start
acting on feedback before the reviewer submitted it.
## What changed
- Correlate inline comments with their parent review and ignore pending
reviews and their comments.
- Remove pending review IDs from saved watcher state so the feedback
surfaces normally after publication.
- Update the skill instructions and add regression coverage for the
draft-to-published transition.
## Validation
- `python3 -m pytest
.codex/skills/babysit-pr/scripts/test_gh_pr_watch.py`
- Skill package validation with `quick_validate.py`
- Live verification on #26835: the draft comment stayed hidden and
surfaced after the review was submitted.
# Why
Codex is doing a bit too much on my PRs that it's babysitting. In
particular I'd like it to not interact with comment threads that involve
other humans -- I should be the one doing human interaction. This is
tricky because it's still very useful to be able to drop review comments
myself and have Codex iterate on them.
## What
This updates `.codex/skills/babysit-pr/SKILL.md` with an explicit GitHub
state mutation policy.
## Summary
- Surface failed GitHub Actions jobs in the PR babysitter watcher so
Codex can fetch job logs as soon as a job fails, instead of waiting for
the overall workflow run to complete.
- Update babysit-pr skill instructions, GitHub API notes, and heuristics
to prefer direct job log archives before falling back to `gh run view
--log-failed`.
- Add guardrails requiring explicit user confirmation before posting
replies to human-authored review comments.
- Add guardrails preventing Codex from patching unrelated flaky tests,
CI infrastructure, runner issues, dependency outages, or other failures
not caused by the PR branch.
## Validation
- `python3 -m pytest
.codex/skills/babysit-pr/scripts/test_gh_pr_watch.py`
## Summary
PR Babysitter can reply directly to GitHub code review comments when
feedback is non-actionable, already addressed, or not valid. Those
replies should be visibly attributed so reviewers do not mistake an
automated Codex response for a message from the human operator.
This updates the skill instructions to require GitHub code review
replies from the babysitter to start with `[codex]`.
## Changes
- Adds the `[codex]` prefix requirement to the core PR Babysitter
workflow.
- Repeats the requirement in the review comment handling guidance where
agents decide whether to reply to a review thread.
## Summary
- prioritize newly surfaced review comments ahead of CI and mergeability
handling in the PR babysitter watcher
- keep `--watch` running for open PRs even when they are currently
merge-ready so later review feedback is not missed
This PR updates the "PR Babysitter" skill to clarify that non-actionable
review comments should receive a direct reply explaining why no change
is needed, and actionable review comments should be marked "resolved"
after they are addressed.
## PR Notes
This PR adds a project-scoped `babysit-pr` skill for ongoing PR
monitoring (CI, reviews, mergeability).
Simply invoke this skill after creating a PR, and codex will do its best
to get it to a mergeable state:
### What the skill does
* Fixes CI failures related to the PR
* Retries CI failures due to flaky tests
* Addresses code review comments if it agrees with them
* Addresses merge conflicts on main branch
### How the skill works
- Polls PR status on a loop (CI checks, workflow runs, review activity,
mergeability, and review decision).
- Detects new review feedback (including inline comments and automated
Codex review comments) and prompts/handles follow-up work.
- Distinguishes pending vs failed vs passed CI and identifies likely
flaky failures.
- Can retry failed checks/workflows when appropriate.
- Prioritizes actionable code review feedback over flaky CI retries (to
avoid rerunning CI on a SHA that is about to be replaced).
- Continues monitoring after fixes are applied and pushed, rather than
stopping after a progress update.
- Uses a slower backoff polling cadence once CI is green, while still
watching for new review feedback or state changes.
- Treats required review/approval as a blocking condition and keeps
watching until the PR is actually merge-ready (or merged/closed, or
human intervention is needed).
### Intended outcome
Keep the PR moving with minimal manual babysitting by continuously
watching for CI failures, reviewer feedback, and merge blockers, and
responding in the right order until the PR is ready to merge.
Adam Perry @ OpenAI