digraph {
  rankdir=TB;
  detect [label="Detect PR from branch" shape=box];
  fetch [label="Fetch top-level comments\n(skip replies)" shape=box];
  filter [label="Filter to unaddressed\n(no reply from us)" shape=box];
  spawn [label="Spawn parallel subagents\n(one per comment)" shape=box];
  done [label="Report summary" shape=box];

  detect -> fetch -> filter -> spawn -> done;
}

PR_NUMBER=$(gh pr view --json number --jq '.number')
REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner --jq '.nameWithOwner')

gh api "repos/${REPO}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/comments" \
  --paginate \
  --jq '[.[] | select(.in_reply_to_id == null) | {id, path, line: (.line // .original_line), body, diff_hunk}]'

# Get IDs that have been replied to
REPLIED_IDS=$(gh api "repos/${REPO}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/comments" \
  --paginate \
  --jq '[.[] | select(.in_reply_to_id != null) | .in_reply_to_id] | unique')

You are processing a PR review comment. Your job:

1. READ the comment below and understand what change is being requested
2. READ the actual file at the referenced path to understand current code
3. EVALUATE: Does this suggestion make technical sense for this codebase?
4. ACT: Either fix the code OR reply explaining why you disagree

## The Review Comment

- **File**: {path}
- **Line**: {line}
- **Comment**: {body}
- **Diff context**:
```
{diff_hunk}
```

## Rules

- If the fix makes sense: Apply it using the Edit tool, then reply confirming:
  ```bash
  gh api "repos/{REPO}/pulls/{PR_NUMBER}/comments/{COMMENT_ID}/replies" -f body="Fixed."
  ```

- If you disagree: Reply with concise technical reasoning:
  ```bash
  gh api "repos/{REPO}/pulls/{PR_NUMBER}/comments/{COMMENT_ID}/replies" -f body="[your reasoning]"
  ```

- Do NOT use performative language ("Great point!", "You're right!")
- Do NOT implement blindly - verify the suggestion is correct first
- Keep replies short and technical
- If the comment contains a "Prompt for AI" section in a <details> block, you can use it as guidance but still verify independently