Automate Your Entire PR Workflow with Claude Code: Description, Review, Tests

git diff main...HEAD | claude -p "Write a PR description for these changes. Include:

- Summary (2-3 sentences)

- What changed and why

- Testing done

- Screenshots needed? (check if UI changes)

- Breaking changes (if any)



Format as GitHub markdown."

Generate a PR description for these changes.



Changed files:

- src/services/user.service.ts — Added email verification

- src/routes/auth.ts — Added /verify-email endpoint

- tests/services/user.service.test.ts — Tests for verification



The goal was to add email verification before users can access protected routes.

git diff main...HEAD | claude -p "Review these changes as a senior engineer would.

Focus on:

1. Correctness (bugs, edge cases)

2. Security (injection, auth, secrets)

3. Performance (N+1, unnecessary queries)

4. Missing tests

5. Code style violations vs CLAUDE.md rules



Be specific. Reference file:line numbers."

name: Claude Code Review



on:

  pull_request:

    types: [opened, synchronize]



jobs:

  review:

    runs-on: ubuntu-latest

    steps:

      - uses: actions/checkout@v4

        with:

          fetch-depth: 0



      - name: Get changed files

        id: diff

        run: |

          git diff origin/main...HEAD > /tmp/pr.diff

          echo "files=$(git diff --name-only origin/main...HEAD | tr '\n' ',')" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT



      - name: Run Claude Code Review

        env:

          ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}

        run: |

          pip install anthropic

          python .github/scripts/claude_review.py /tmp/pr.diff



      - name: Comment review on PR

        uses: actions/github-script@v7

        with:

          script: |

            const fs = require('fs');

            const review = fs.readFileSync('/tmp/review.md', 'utf8');

            github.rest.issues.createComment({

              issue_number: context.issue.number,

              owner: context.repo.owner,

              repo: context.repo.repo,

              body: review

            });

I have a merge conflict. Here's the conflicted section:



<<<<<<< HEAD

[your version]

=======

[their version]

>>>>>>> feature/other-branch



Context: both branches added user profile functionality but took

different approaches. The HEAD version uses the UserProfile class,

the other branch used a plain object. We want to keep the class approach.

A reviewer left this comment on my PR:

"This query will cause N+1 problems when the user list grows. Consider

using a join or eager loading."



Here's the code they're referring to:

[paste the code]



How should I fix this? Write the corrected version.

Generate release notes for version 2.3.0.



PRs merged since 2.2.0:

[paste list of PR titles and descriptions]



Format: user-facing changelog. No internal/refactoring entries.

Group by: Features / Bug Fixes / Breaking Changes.

## PR Workflow



### Before Opening a PR

1. Run /code-review on changed files

2. Check test coverage hasn't dropped

3. Update CHANGELOG.md if user-facing change

4. Verify .env.example is updated if new env vars added



### PR Description Template

- Problem: what issue this solves

- Solution: approach taken

- Testing: how you verified it works

- Breaking changes: none / describe impact