| name | apply-findings |
|---|---|
| description | Apply findings by making the suggested code changes. Applies accepted verdicts, escalates ambiguous findings to the user, and offers to note skipped genuine improvements. Use when the user asks to "apply findings", "apply fixes", "apply suggestions", "apply accepted findings", "fix the findings", or "apply the review results". |
Apply evaluated findings from the conversation context. Findings must have been through /evaluate-findings first.
Collect all findings from the conversation context. Findings should have Verdict columns (Apply, Skip, Escalate) from /evaluate-findings.
If findings are unevaluated (raw output without verdicts), stop and say to run /evaluate-findings first.
Group Apply findings by file path and apply in file order to minimize context switching. For each finding:
- Read the full function or logical block at the referenced location
- Verify the finding still applies to the current code
- Make the fix
If a finding references code that has changed since it was generated (e.g., by a prior fix in this same run), re-assess whether it still applies. Skip if the code has diverged.
For findings with Escalate verdict, use AskUserQuestion to present the trade-offs and let the user decide:
- Apply — make the change
- Skip — leave as-is
- Note for later — run the
/note-improvementskill to capture it
Do not surface findings skipped as false positives or subjective preferences. For findings skipped solely because they are pre-existing, out of scope, or disproportionate, use AskUserQuestion to ask whether the user wants to apply the improvement now or note it for later:
- Apply now — make the change inline
- Note for later — run the
/note-improvementskill to capture it
Summarize what was applied, what was escalated, and what was skipped.
Check your task list for remaining tasks and proceed.
- Only edit files. Do not stage, build, or test.
- If two findings conflict (suggest opposite changes to the same code), skip both and report the conflict.