Prompt file imported from zacol/happyrisk (.windsurf/workflows/coderabbit-fix-finding.md). Fill in {{issue}}, {{prompt}} before use. Copyright stays with the author.

coderabbit-fix-finding

Name: coderabbit-fix-finding
Author: zacol

Description

Verify and resolve a Code Rabbit review finding using the issue description and the AI agent remediation prompt provided by Code Rabbit.

Use this workflow when:

Code Rabbit reports an issue in a file
The review includes both a finding description and an AI remediation prompt
You want to validate the finding before applying any fix
You want to avoid fixing false positives or outdated comments

Inputs

`{{issue}}`

The Code Rabbit issue description explaining the reported problem.

Example:

Clarify SLACK_REDIRECT_URI fail-fast behavior.

Line 26 lists SLACK_REDIRECT_URI as a required environment variable, but line 31 only mentions SLACK_CLIENT_ID, SLACK_CLIENT_SECRET, and SLACK_SIGNING_SECRET as variables that should trigger fail-fast in non-development environments. Should SLACK_REDIRECT_URI also be included in the fail-fast check, or is it acceptable for it to be missing?

`{{prompt}}`

The AI remediation instruction generated by Code Rabbit.

Example:

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In @docs/slackIntegration.md around lines 26 - 31, update the security note to explicitly state whether SLACK_REDIRECT_URI is required at startup and, if required, include it alongside SLACK_CLIENT_ID, SLACK_CLIENT_SECRET, and SLACK_SIGNING_SECRET as a variable that triggers fail-fast in non-development environments...

Instructions

1. Analyze the Review Finding

Carefully read the reported issue:

{{issue}}

Determine:

What inconsistency or defect is being reported
Which file(s) are affected
Whether the finding concerns:
- Documentation mismatch
- Code bug
- Missing validation
- Incorrect implementation
- Stale or outdated review feedback

2. Review Code Rabbit Suggested Fix Context

Read and interpret the remediation prompt:

{{prompt}}

Extract:

Exact file(s) to inspect
Relevant line ranges
Expected corrective action
Whether Code Rabbit suggests:
- Clarification only
- Code modification
- Documentation update
- Validation logic change

3. Verify Against Current Repository State

Inspect the current codebase before making changes:

Open referenced files
Review surrounding implementation context
Confirm whether the issue still exists in the latest version

Important:

Do not assume Code Rabbit is always correct
Ignore findings already resolved by later edits
Detect false positives

4. Apply Fix Only If Necessary

If the issue is valid:

Implement the minimal correct fix
Preserve existing style and conventions
Avoid unrelated refactors
Update only affected files

If the issue is no longer valid:

Do not modify code unnecessarily
Explain clearly why no change is needed

5. Validate the Result

After applying changes:

Re-check consistency across related files
Ensure documentation matches implementation
Verify no contradictory behavior remains

Output Format

Status:
Fixed | No change needed

Summary:
<brief explanation of what was changed or why no fix was required>

Files Updated:
<list of modified files, if any>

# coderabbit-fix-finding ## Description Verify and resolve a Code Rabbit review finding using the issue description and the AI agent remediation prompt provided by Code Rabbit. Use this workflow when: - Code Rabbit reports an issue in a file - The review includes both a finding description and an AI remediation prompt - You want to validate the finding before applying any fix - You want to avoid fixing false positives or outdated comments --- ## Inputs ### `{{issue}}` The Code Rabbit issue description explaining the reported problem. Example: ```text Clarify SLACK_REDIRECT_URI fail-fast behavior. Line 26 lists SLACK_REDIRECT_URI as a required environment variable, but line 31 only mentions SLACK_CLIENT_ID, SLACK_CLIENT_SECRET, and SLACK_SIGNING_SECRET as variables that should trigger fail-fast in non-development environments. Should SLACK_REDIRECT_URI also be included in the fail-fast check, or is it acceptable for it to be missing? ``` --- ### `{{prompt}}` The AI remediation instruction generated by Code Rabbit. Example: ```text Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In @docs/slackIntegration.md around lines 26 - 31, update the security note to explicitly state whether SLACK_REDIRECT_URI is required at startup and, if required, include it alongside SLACK_CLIENT_ID, SLACK_CLIENT_SECRET, and SLACK_SIGNING_SECRET as a variable that triggers fail-fast in non-development environments... ``` --- ## Instructions ### 1. Analyze the Review Finding Carefully read the reported issue: ```text {{issue}} ``` Determine: - What inconsistency or defect is being reported - Which file(s) are affected - Whether the finding concerns: - Documentation mismatch - Code bug - Missing validation - Incorrect implementation - Stale or outdated review feedback --- ### 2. Review Code Rabbit Suggested Fix Context Read and interpret the remediation prompt: ```text {{prompt}} ``` Extract: - Exact file(s) to inspect - Relevant line ranges - Expected corrective action - Whether Code Rabbit suggests: - Clarification only - Code modification - Documentation update - Validation logic change --- ### 3. Verify Against Current Repository State Inspect the current codebase before making changes: - Open referenced files - Review surrounding implementation context - Confirm whether the issue still exists in the latest version Important: - Do not assume Code Rabbit is always correct - Ignore findings already resolved by later edits - Detect false positives --- ### 4. Apply Fix Only If Necessary If the issue is valid: - Implement the minimal correct fix - Preserve existing style and conventions - Avoid unrelated refactors - Update only affected files If the issue is no longer valid: - Do not modify code unnecessarily - Explain clearly why no change is needed --- ### 5. Validate the Result After applying changes: - Re-check consistency across related files - Ensure documentation matches implementation - Verify no contradictory behavior remains --- ## Output Format ```text Status: Fixed | No change needed Summary: <brief explanation of what was changed or why no fix was required> Files Updated: <list of modified files, if any> ```

{ "prompt": "# coderabbit-fix-finding\n\n## Description\n\nVerify and resolve a Code Rabbit review finding using the issue description and the AI agent remediation prompt provided by Code Rabbit.\n\nUse this workflow when:\n\n- Code Rabbit reports an issue in a file\n- The review includes both a finding description and an AI remediation prompt\n- You want to validate the finding before applying any fix\n- You want to avoid fixing false positives or outdated comments\n\n---\n\n## Inputs\n\n### `{{issue}}`\n\nThe Code Rabbit issue description explaining the reported problem.\n\nExample:\n\n```text\nClarify SLACK_REDIRECT_URI fail-fast behavior.\n\nLine 26 lists SLACK_REDIRECT_URI as a required environment variable, but line 31 only mentions SLACK_CLIENT_ID, SLACK_CLIENT_SECRET, and SLACK_SIGNING_SECRET as variables that should trigger fail-fast in non-development environments. Should SLACK_REDIRECT_URI also be included in the fail-fast check, or is it acceptable for it to be missing?\n```\n\n---\n\n### `{{prompt}}`\n\nThe AI remediation instruction generated by Code Rabbit.\n\nExample:\n\n```text\nVerify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.\n\nIn @docs/slackIntegration.md around lines 26 - 31, update the security note to explicitly state whether SLACK_REDIRECT_URI is required at startup and, if required, include it alongside SLACK_CLIENT_ID, SLACK_CLIENT_SECRET, and SLACK_SIGNING_SECRET as a variable that triggers fail-fast in non-development environments...\n```\n\n---\n\n## Instructions\n\n### 1. Analyze the Review Finding\n\nCarefully read the reported issue:\n\n```text\n{{issue}}\n```\n\nDetermine:\n\n- What inconsistency or defect is being reported\n- Which file(s) are affected\n- Whether the finding concerns:\n - Documentation mismatch\n - Code bug\n - Missing validation\n - Incorrect implementation\n - Stale or outdated review feedback\n\n---\n\n### 2. Review Code Rabbit Suggested Fix Context\n\nRead and interpret the remediation prompt:\n\n```text\n{{prompt}}\n```\n\nExtract:\n\n- Exact file(s) to inspect\n- Relevant line ranges\n- Expected corrective action\n- Whether Code Rabbit suggests:\n - Clarification only\n - Code modification\n - Documentation update\n - Validation logic change\n\n---\n\n### 3. Verify Against Current Repository State\n\nInspect the current codebase before making changes:\n\n- Open referenced files\n- Review surrounding implementation context\n- Confirm whether the issue still exists in the latest version\n\nImportant:\n\n- Do not assume Code Rabbit is always correct\n- Ignore findings already resolved by later edits\n- Detect false positives\n\n---\n\n### 4. Apply Fix Only If Necessary\n\nIf the issue is valid:\n\n- Implement the minimal correct fix\n- Preserve existing style and conventions\n- Avoid unrelated refactors\n- Update only affected files\n\nIf the issue is no longer valid:\n\n- Do not modify code unnecessarily\n- Explain clearly why no change is needed\n\n---\n\n### 5. Validate the Result\n\nAfter applying changes:\n\n- Re-check consistency across related files\n- Ensure documentation matches implementation\n- Verify no contradictory behavior remains\n\n---\n\n## Output Format\n\n```text\nStatus:\nFixed | No change needed\n\nSummary:\n<brief explanation of what was changed or why no fix was required>\n\nFiles Updated:\n<list of modified files, if any>\n```", "variables": [ "issue", "prompt" ], "notes": "Verify and resolve a Code Rabbit review finding using the issue description and the AI agent remediation prompt provided by Code Rabbit.", "metadata": { "source": { "provider": "github-windsurf-workflows", "repository": "https://github.com/zacol/happyrisk", "path": ".windsurf/workflows/coderabbit-fix-finding.md", "ref": "c9c025f8b5ab7916686ed876cc981e02da765d5b", "url": "https://github.com/zacol/happyrisk/blob/c9c025f8b5ab7916686ed876cc981e02da765d5b/.windsurf/workflows/coderabbit-fix-finding.md", "key": "zacol/happyrisk/.windsurf/workflows/coderabbit-fix-finding.md" } } }

coderabbit-fix-finding

About

coderabbit-fix-finding

Description

Inputs

`{{issue}}`

`{{prompt}}`

Instructions

1. Analyze the Review Finding

2. Review Code Rabbit Suggested Fix Context

3. Verify Against Current Repository State

4. Apply Fix Only If Necessary

5. Validate the Result

Output Format

Use it

Manifest

Reviews