[code-infra] Grant Claude review pull-requests: write - #5375
Conversation
The review posts its comment with `gh pr comment`, which goes through the GraphQL `addComment` mutation on the PR node rather than POST /issues/{n}/comments. That needs pull-requests: write; issues: write does not cover it, so with read the mutation 403s and the run finishes green having posted nothing (run 30492713068 on #5362).
Bumps the pin to the mui-public revert (mui/mui-public#1744), which restores the same scope in the reusable workflow.
Janpot
added
type: bug
commit: |
Bundle size
PerformanceTotal duration: 1,225.68 ms -157.57 ms(-11.4%) | Renders: 78 (+0) | Paint: 1,935.61 ms -265.34 ms(-12.1%)
11 tests within noise — details Check out the code infra dashboard for more information about this PR. |
✅ Deploy Preview for base-ui ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
|
Hopefully this starts working 😅 |
|
🤷 It's just the usual GHA integration hell. I should have better verified that hallucinated simplification before propagating that permission downgrade. Still going try and build more feedback into it to not make it fail so silently. |
|
@Janpot Opus 5 supposedly does better on coding evals than Fable and is half the cost, maybe we can switch to it? Maybe Fable is still better at reviews though, I'm not sure. I still find that all PRs need a GPT-5.6 review in conjunction with Claude to catch "everything" anyway; we can't really rely on just one model per PR to truly avoid 99% of regressions (some can slip through no matter what). They each always find some problem that tests don't yet encode. |
|
Improving feedback and setting opus-5 in mui/mui-public#1745 |
2 participants
The review posts its comment with
gh pr comment, which goes through the GraphQLaddCommentmutation on the PR node rather thanPOST /issues/{n}/comments. That needspull-requests: write—issues: writedoesn't cover it, so withreadthe mutation 403s and the run finishes green having posted nothing (run 30492713068 on #5362 did exactly that).Also bumps the pin to the mui-public revert (mui/mui-public#1744), which restores the same scope in the reusable workflow.