fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck check + add check_neutral summary-mode by JBWatenbergScality · Pull Request #105 · scality/workflows

JBWatenbergScality · 2026-05-19T11:53:19Z

Summary

Two additive changes to the reusable Claude Code Review workflow:

Finalize stuck in_progress checks — the Run Claude Code Review step has continue-on-error: true and the job has a 15-min timeout-minutes. If Claude crashes, times out, or the runner is cancelled after the initial in_progress publish, the Claude Code Review check stays at status=in_progress forever and blocks any branch protection that waits on it.
Adds a post-step that runs when steps.claude-review.outcome != 'success'. It locates publish-summary.sh in whichever marketplace was checked out (glob: .marketplaces/*/plugins/scality-skills/skills/review-pr/publish-summary.sh) and invokes it with the cancelled conclusion, finalizing the check with a link back to the workflow run.
New check_neutral value for summary-mode — like check (check run only, no fallback) but uses GitHub's non-blocking neutral conclusion when issues are found, so the review check does not contribute a failure to the PR status rollup and stops shadowing real CI checks. The full review summary still appears in the check run. Default auto preserves the existing blocking-check contract for consumers who rely on it in branch protection.

The actual action_required → neutral translation lives in publish-summary.sh (scality/agent-hub#47); this PR just surfaces the new mode at the workflow input layer.

Companion

scality/agent-hub#47 — implements check_neutral in PUBLISH_MODE and the cancelled conclusion handling in publish-summary.sh.

This PR is a no-op for check_neutral until scality/agent-hub#47 lands, but the finalization step is functional immediately (the existing script already passes cancelled straight to GitHub's API).

Test plan

Merge scality/agent-hub#47 first so check_neutral resolves and cancelled gets its title/emoji.
Default-path: run a normal review with summary-mode: auto (default). Verify the check still publishes as action_required when issues are found (existing consumers see no change).
Opt-in path: a consumer sets summary-mode: check_neutral and verifies the check appears as neutral (grey circle, full summary visible, no contribution to the Required CI status).
Failure path: trigger a Claude failure (invalid prompt arg) and verify the check ends as cancelled with a link to the run, not stuck at in_progress.
Timeout path: force a runner timeout (timeout-minutes: 1) and verify the post-step still runs via always() and finalizes the check.
Happy path: a normal completed review skips the post-step (steps.claude-review.outcome == 'success') — no double-finalization.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…ilure The reusable Claude code-review workflow publishes an "in_progress" check at the start of the review and relies on Claude itself to call publish-summary.sh again with the final conclusion. When the Claude action fails (continue-on-error masks it), the 15-min timeout fires, or the runner is cancelled, the check sits at status=in_progress forever and blocks any branch protection that waits on it. Add a post-step that runs when steps.claude-review.outcome != 'success'. It locates publish-summary.sh in whichever marketplace was checked out and invokes it with the new "cancelled" conclusion, which finalizes the check with a link back to the workflow run. Companion: scality/agent-hub#47 — adds the "cancelled" conclusion (and switches the success-with-issues conclusion from "action_required" to "neutral" so the check no longer shadows real CI status). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

claude · 2026-05-19T11:55:03Z

LGTM

Review by Claude Code

claude · 2026-05-20T14:34:41Z

LGTM

Review by Claude Code

charlesprost · 2026-05-20T14:57:29Z

+          HEAD_SHA: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}
+          RUN_URL: ${{ github.server_url }}/${{ github.repository }}/actions/runs/${{ github.run_id }}
+        run: |
+          script=$(ls .marketplaces/*/plugins/scality-skills/skills/review-pr/publish-summary.sh 2>/dev/null | head -1)


This seems rather explicit and if we change the location or name of this script we break everything; are we sure to use it this way?

francoisferrand · 2026-05-20T14:58:52Z

+      - name: Finalize stuck Claude Code Review check
+        if: always() && steps.claude-review.outcome != 'success'
+        env:
+          GH_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }}


should not be needed, set already by GitHub?

francoisferrand · 2026-05-20T15:01:13Z

          PUBLISH_MODE: ${{ inputs.summary-mode }}
+          CLAUDE_REVIEW_NEUTRAL: ${{ inputs.neutral-on-issues }}
+
+      # Finalize the "Claude Code Review" check when the review job did not


FYI (and probably not the point of this PR) : ideally, I would have called the script from here, instead of letting claude do it. This however required finding how to generate an "outcome" from Claude, and process it in next step, which I did not have to investigate....

(start of review could be posted here instead of in the skill)

francoisferrand · 2026-05-20T15:01:50Z

+      # Without this the check sits at status=in_progress forever and blocks
+      # any branch protection that waits on it.
+      - name: Finalize stuck Claude Code Review check
+        if: always() && steps.claude-review.outcome != 'success'


should not be called when using legacy skill (from the repo) which does not rely on the script...

Added steps.claude-review.outcome != 'success' so it only applies when required

francoisferrand · 2026-05-20T15:03:40Z

          - comment: post as a PR comment
          - auto: check if allowed, otherwise post as a comment
        default: auto
+      neutral-on-issues:


seems to be would be better as another summary-mode (neutral-check maybe?)

Folds the neutral opt-in into the existing summary-mode input instead of adding a new boolean. Consumers select between blocking and non-blocking review checks the same way they already select between check / comment / auto. - check_neutral: like `check` (check run only, no fallback) but uses GitHub's non-blocking `neutral` conclusion when issues are found, so the review check does not contribute a failure to the PR status rollup and stops shadowing real CI checks. The full review summary still appears in the check run. The actual `action_required` → `neutral` translation lives in publish-summary.sh (scality/agent-hub#47); this PR just exposes the new mode at the workflow input layer. Default (auto) preserves the historical blocking behavior, so existing consumers see no change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

claude · 2026-05-20T15:33:29Z

LGTM

Review by Claude Code

Addresses three review comments on PR #105: - charlesprost: the previous step hardcoded the path to publish-summary.sh in the agent-hub marketplace checkout, so renaming or moving the script would silently break this workflow. The finalize step does exactly one thing — find the in-progress "Claude Code Review" check on this SHA and PATCH it to cancelled — which is ~10 lines of gh api with no skill coupling. Title/summary formatting now lives in two places (here and in publish-summary.sh) but is unlikely to evolve; worth the decoupling. - francoisferrand: the GH_TOKEN env line is redundant — gh CLI picks up the runner-injected GITHUB_TOKEN automatically when the job has the appropriate permissions block (which this one does). - francoisferrand: legacy skills that do not publish an in_progress check no longer cause a spurious script invocation. The gh api GET returns empty for those cases and the step exits 0 naturally. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

claude · 2026-05-20T17:33:24Z

LGTM

Review by Claude Code

JBWatenbergScality marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2026 14:32

JBWatenbergScality requested a review from a team as a code owner May 20, 2026 14:32

JBWatenbergScality changed the title ~~fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck "in_progress" check on job failure~~ fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck check + add neutral-on-issues opt-in May 20, 2026

charlesprost reviewed May 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

francoisferrand reviewed May 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

JBWatenbergScality force-pushed the fix/review-finalize-stuck-check branch from a0fe571 to f643d5a Compare May 20, 2026 15:31

JBWatenbergScality changed the title ~~fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck check + add neutral-on-issues opt-in~~ fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck check + add check_neutral summary-mode May 20, 2026

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck check + add check_neutral summary-mode#105

fix(claude-code-review): finalize stuck check + add check_neutral summary-mode#105
JBWatenbergScality wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
fix/review-finalize-stuck-check

JBWatenbergScality commented May 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

charlesprost May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

JBWatenbergScality May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

JBWatenbergScality commented May 19, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Companion

Test plan

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

charlesprost May 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JBWatenbergScality May 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

francoisferrand May 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

JBWatenbergScality commented May 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading