opencode-review.yml

name: opencode-review

on:
  issue_comment:
    types: [created]

permissions:
  contents: read
  pull-requests: write

jobs:
  review:
    if: |
      github.event.issue.pull_request &&
      contains(github.event.comment.body, '/review') &&
      github.event.comment.author_association == 'OWNER'
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    timeout-minutes: 5
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v6
        with:
          persist-credentials: false

      - uses: anomalyco/opencode/github@latest
        env:
          OPENCODE_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.OPENCODE_API_KEY }}
          GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
          OPENCODE_PERMISSION: '{ "bash": { "*": "deny", "gh*": "allow", "gh pr review*": "deny", "gh pr review --comment*": "allow" } }'
        with:
          model: opencode/big-pickle
          use_github_token: true
          prompt: |
            Review this pull request:
            - **Code quality**: Spot style, maintainability, and correctness issues
            - **Bugs**: Catch logic errors, edge cases, and incorrect assumptions
            - **Improvements**: Suggest better approaches where applicable
            - **Guidelines**: See CONTRIBUTING.md for project-specific conventions
            - **PR health**: Comment if the PR mixes unrelated changes, lacks a clear "why" in the description, or is unreasonably large for what it achieves.
            - **Contributor check**: For external contributors, verify the PR template is filled out, CI passes, and CONTRIBUTING.md was followed.

            Diffs are important, but make sure you read the entire file to get proper context. Make it clear the suggestions are merely suggestions and the human can decide what to do.

            If applicable, use `gh pr review --comment` to post inline suggestions on specific lines. Use a review comment (not inline) for high-level architectural or cross-file feedback. If you have a good suggested fix, include it in a code suggestion block.