contrib-pr-review — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited contrib-pr-review (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Review PR #$ARGUMENTS from external contributor for safety, quality, and readiness.
PR Metadata:
!`gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --repo homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp --json author,additions,deletions,files,commits,closingIssuesReferences,isDraft,reviews,url,title,body`Contributor Stats:
!`gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/pulls/$ARGUMENTS --jq '{author: .user.login, user_id: .user.id}' | jq -r '.author' | xargs -I {} gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/contributors --jq '.[] | select(.login == "{}") | {login: .login, contributions: .contributions}'`Files Changed:
!`gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/pulls/$ARGUMENTS/files --jq '.[] | {filename: .filename, status: .status, additions: .additions, deletions: .deletions, changes: .changes, patch: .patch}' | head -50`Note: Gemini Code Assist now handles security assessment automatically. Check if Gemini flagged any security concerns.
# Check if Gemini posted security-related comments
gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --repo homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp --json comments --jq '.comments[] | select(.author.login == "gemini-code-assist" or .body | contains("security") or contains("Security")) | {author: .author.login, body: .body}'If Gemini flagged security issues:
If NO Gemini security flags but you notice concerning patterns:
.github/ workflow modifications with pull_request_target.claude/ agent/skill changes that could affect behaviorIf security assessment passes and PR has workflow changes or new workflows:
# Check current workflow status
gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/pulls/$ARGUMENTS/requested_reviewers
# Enable workflows if not enabled (requires WRITE permission)
# This command may fail if already enabled - that's OK
gh api -X PUT /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/actions/workflows/pr.yml/enable 2>/dev/null || echo "Workflows already enabled or no permission"Pre-existing tests (easier review if modified code is already tested):
# For each modified source file, check if tests exist
gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/pulls/$ARGUMENTS/files --jq '.[] | select(.filename | startswith("src/")) | .filename' | while read file; do
basename=$(basename "$file" .py)
echo "Checking tests for: $file"
# Method 1: Look for test files by naming convention
find tests/ -name "test_${basename}.py" -o -name "test_*${basename}*.py" 2>/dev/null | head -3
# Method 2: Grep for function/class names from the modified file
# Extract function/class names and search for them in tests
grep -E '^(def|class|async def) [a-zA-Z_]' "$file" 2>/dev/null | head -5 | while read line; do
name=$(echo "$line" | sed -E 's/.*(def|class) ([a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]*).*/\2/')
if [ -n "$name" ]; then
grep -r "$name" tests/ 2>/dev/null | head -1
fi
done
doneNew tests added:
# Check if PR adds or modifies tests
gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/pulls/$ARGUMENTS/files --jq '.[] | select(.filename | startswith("tests/")) | {filename: .filename, status: .status, additions: .additions}'Output Test Summary:
🧪 Test Coverage:
- Pre-existing tests: ✅ Modified code has tests / ⚠️ No tests for modified code
- New tests: ✅ PR adds X test files / ⚠️ No new tests
- Assessment: [Easy/Medium/Hard to review based on test coverage]Calculate PR size and assess appropriateness:
# From metadata: additions + deletions
total_lines=$(gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --repo homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp --json additions,deletions --jq '.additions + .deletions')
echo "Total lines changed: $total_lines"
# Get contributor experience
author=$(gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --repo homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp --json author --jq -r '.author.login')
# Check 1: Contributions to this project
project_contributions=$(gh api /repos/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp/contributors --jq ".[] | select(.login == \"$author\") | .contributions" || echo "0")
# Check 2: Total GitHub commits (overall experience)
total_commits=$(gh api /users/$author --jq '.public_repos + .total_private_repos' 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
echo "Contributor: $author"
echo "Project contributions: $project_contributions"
echo "GitHub experience: $total_commits repos"Assess:
Output Size Summary:
📏 PR Size:
- Lines changed: [total]
- Contributor: [first-time / regular] ([X] contributions)
- Assessment: [size appropriateness]Check linked issues:
# From metadata: closingIssuesReferences
gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --repo homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp --json closingIssuesReferences --jq '.closingIssuesReferences[] | {number: .number, title: .title}'If issue linked:
If no issue linked:
Output Intent Summary:
🎯 Intent & Linkage:
- Linked issue: #X "title" / ⚠️ No issue linked
- Solves issue: ✅ Fully addresses requirements / ⚠️ Partial / ❌ Doesn't match
- Scope: ✅ Focused / ⚠️ Scope creep detectedNote: Gemini Code Assist provides automated code review on all PRs. This step focuses on what Gemini cannot assess:
Breaking change assessment:
Quick checks:
# Check if ruff/mypy would complain (from workflow logs if available)
gh pr checks $ARGUMENTS --repo homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp | grep -E "(ruff|mypy|lint)"
# Check for common issues in diff
grep -E "(TODO|FIXME|XXX|HACK)" /tmp/pr_$ARGUMENTS.diffOutput Quality Summary:
✨ Code Quality:
- Architecture fit: [assessment - service layer, context engineering]
- Breaking changes: ✅ None / ⚠️ Detected - [describe what's genuinely lost]
- Gemini reviews: [check if Gemini flagged anything critical]After completing all steps, present a short summary of what the PR does and the review findings, then ask: "Should I post this comment to the PR?"
After completing the analysis, draft a comment for the PR following these guidelines:
Comment Length:
Style:
Structure for "Good to Merge" (10-15 lines):
[Positive opening line about the contribution]
[1-2 sentences on what works well - focus on functionality, tests, architecture]
[Any minor suggestions or notes - optional, technical only]
[Closing line about readiness to merge]Note: Do NOT mention security assessment in comment unless issues were found. Security checks are internal.
Structure for "Changes Needed" (max 25 lines):
[Positive opening line acknowledging the work]
[Brief summary of the issue being solved]
**[Concern 1]:**
[1-2 lines explanation + suggestion - focus on: tests, functionality, architecture, breaking changes]
**[Concern 2]:** (if applicable)
[1-2 lines explanation + suggestion]
**[Concern 3]:** (if applicable)
[1-2 lines explanation + suggestion]
[Closing line about next steps]Note: Security concerns should be raised immediately when found, not in final structured comment.
Example - Good to Merge:
Great work on [feature/fix]. [Performance/quality metric] is impressive.
The implementation follows existing patterns and the [specific aspect] is well-designed. [Optional: Minor note about something noticed].
Ready to merge once CI passes.Example - Changes Needed:
Thanks for tackling [problem]. [Metric/impact] shows this addresses a real need.
**Test coverage:**
Missing tests for the new [feature]. Please add at least one E2E test validating [behavior]. Performance tests not required.
**[Second concern if applicable]:**
[Brief explanation and request]
Once [change 1] and [change 2] are addressed, this should be good to merge.~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.