## Why
The `codex-issue-digest` skill was producing more detail than the daily
digest needed, and broad all-area digests could miss active issues. In
particular, issue #16088 had substantial recent comments and reactions
but did not appear in the weekly all-areas output because GitHub search
was using default relevance ranking and the collector could exhaust its
candidate cap before later search queries got a fair sample.
That made the digest look quieter than the underlying user activity and
made threshold tuning misleading.
## What changed
- Make the digest summary headline-first and summary-only by default.
- Add an explicit opt-in flow for `## Details`, so the issue table is
shown only when requested or when the prompt asks for details upfront.
- Update the collector to request GitHub issue search results with
`sort=updated` and `order=desc`.
- Apply the search candidate cap per query instead of globally across
all queries.
- Bump the collector script version to `3`.
- Add tests that cover updated sorting and per-query candidate limits.
## Verification
- `pytest
.codex/skills/codex-issue-digest/scripts/test_collect_issue_digest.py`
- `ruff check
.codex/skills/codex-issue-digest/scripts/collect_issue_digest.py
.codex/skills/codex-issue-digest/scripts/test_collect_issue_digest.py`
- `git diff --check`
- Reran the all-areas weekly collector and confirmed #16088 is now
included with `55` interactions.
Problem: Maintainers need a shared way to run Codex GitHub issue digests
without copying large prompts or relying on manual GitHub page
summaries.
Solution: Add a reusable codex-issue-digest skill with a deterministic
GitHub collector, owner/all-label windows, reaction-aware activity
metrics, scaled attention markers, and focused tests.
## Summary
This updates the code review orchestrator skill wording so the
instruction explicitly requires returning every issue from every
subagent.
## Impact
The change is limited to `.codex/skills/code-review/SKILL.md` and
clarifies review aggregation behavior for future Codex-driven reviews.
## Validation
No tests were run because this is a markdown-only skill wording change.
## Summary
PR Babysitter can reply directly to GitHub code review comments when
feedback is non-actionable, already addressed, or not valid. Those
replies should be visibly attributed so reviewers do not mistake an
automated Codex response for a message from the human operator.
This updates the skill instructions to require GitHub code review
replies from the babysitter to start with `[codex]`.
## Changes
- Adds the `[codex]` prefix requirement to the core PR Babysitter
workflow.
- Repeats the requirement in the review comment handling guidance where
agents decide whether to reply to a review thread.
## Motivation
Codex needs a repeatable workflow for updating PR metadata after a pull
request already exists. This is more specific than generic GitHub
handling: the assistant needs to preserve author-provided body content,
explain why the PR exists before listing implementation details, and
describe only the net change under review, including when Sapling stacks
put a PR on top of another PR instead of `main`.
## Changes
- Adds `.codex/skills/codex-pr-body/SKILL.md`.
- Documents how to infer the target PR from the current branch or
commit, including Sapling-specific PR metadata and `sl sl` output.
- Defines the expected PR body update behavior: inspect the existing
body, preserve key content such as images, avoid local absolute paths,
use Markdown formatting, include relevant issue/PR references, and call
out developer docs follow-up only when applicable.
- Captures stacked-PR handling so generated PR text describes the change
between the PR's base and head, rather than unrelated ancestor changes.
## Verification
Not run; this is a Codex skill documentation addition.
## Summary
- prioritize newly surfaced review comments ahead of CI and mergeability
handling in the PR babysitter watcher
- keep `--watch` running for open PRs even when they are currently
merge-ready so later review feedback is not missed
This PR updates the "PR Babysitter" skill to clarify that non-actionable
review comments should receive a direct reply explaining why no change
is needed, and actionable review comments should be marked "resolved"
after they are addressed.
## PR Notes
This PR adds a project-scoped `babysit-pr` skill for ongoing PR
monitoring (CI, reviews, mergeability).
Simply invoke this skill after creating a PR, and codex will do its best
to get it to a mergeable state:
### What the skill does
* Fixes CI failures related to the PR
* Retries CI failures due to flaky tests
* Addresses code review comments if it agrees with them
* Addresses merge conflicts on main branch
### How the skill works
- Polls PR status on a loop (CI checks, workflow runs, review activity,
mergeability, and review decision).
- Detects new review feedback (including inline comments and automated
Codex review comments) and prompts/handles follow-up work.
- Distinguishes pending vs failed vs passed CI and identifies likely
flaky failures.
- Can retry failed checks/workflows when appropriate.
- Prioritizes actionable code review feedback over flaky CI retries (to
avoid rerunning CI on a SHA that is about to be replaced).
- Continues monitoring after fixes are applied and pushed, rather than
stopping after a progress update.
- Uses a slower backoff polling cadence once CI is green, while still
watching for new review feedback or state changes.
- Treats required review/approval as a blocking condition and keeps
watching until the PR is actually merge-ready (or merged/closed, or
human intervention is needed).
### Intended outcome
Keep the PR moving with minimal manual babysitting by continuously
watching for CI failures, reviewer feedback, and merge blockers, and
responding in the right order until the PR is ready to merge.
