fix: reduce pedantic reviews, surface human replies, raise diff/token limits#18
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
|
tested here: |
mgar
approved these changes
May 29, 2026
pru55e11
approved these changes
Jun 1, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fix: prompt change for review, surface human replies, raise diff/token limits
Description
humanResponseso Claude can weigh developer explanations before deciding to re-raiseDIFF_CHAR_LIMITconstant)max_tokensraised from 8192 to 32768 to prevent truncated JSON responses on large diffsRelated Issue
Motivation and Context
The reviewer was raising overly pedantic issues (e.g. singleton test isolation concerns on one-shot scripts, version compatibility for unsupported Node versions). Additionally, when a developer replied to a bot comment explaining their reasoning, the bot would ignore that response and blindly re-raise the same issue on the next review trigger.
How Has This Been Tested?
Manually reviewed script logic. End-to-end validation via a live PR trigger pending.
Screenshots (if appropriate):
Types of changes
Checklist: