feat: 完成首次贡献指南及三项任务修复

.agents/skills/process-pr-reviews/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,281 @@
+---
+name: process-pr-reviews
+description: Use when the user asks to process, triage, fetch, view, count, list, or resolve review feedback in a GitHub PR. Supports both CodeRabbit and Codex review workflows. In this workflow, “real review feedback” is strictly defined as actionable inline comments; for CodeRabbit, exclude review summaries and nitpicks, and for Codex, exclude review summary cards and use PR main-thread reactions only as status signals.
+---
+
+# Process PR Reviews
+
+This workflow supports both CodeRabbit and Codex PR review signals.
+
+## CodeRabbit Reviews
+
+“Real review feedback” is strictly defined as:
+
+- **inline review comments**
+- **not** a review summary
+- **not** a nitpick
+
+Nitpick comments from CodeRabbit must always be ignored to avoid unnecessary noise.
+
+There is no need to analyze the comment content itself.
+
+### Data sources
+
+The CodeRabbit workflow only needs these two sources:
+
+1. **PR review comments**
+
+   ```bash
+   gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/comments
+   ```
+
+   This is the authoritative source for real inline comments.
+
+2. **PR reviews**
+
+   ```bash
+   gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/reviews
+   ```
+
+   This is only used to identify and exclude review summaries / nitpick summaries. It is not used to extract the final result.
+
+Do not treat these as primary sources:
+
+- `gh pr view ...`
+- `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<pr_number>/comments`
+
+Reason: they are not the authoritative source for actionable inline comments.
+
+### Workflow
+
+#### 0. Optional: fetch review thread IDs early if resolve/dismiss may be needed
+
+If the user may ask you to resolve review conversations after triaging them, fetch review thread IDs as soon as you know the PR number:
+
+```bash
+gh api graphql -f query='query { repository(owner: "<owner>", name: "<repo>") { pullRequest(number: <pr_number>) { reviewThreads(first: 100) { nodes { id isResolved comments(first: 20) { nodes { databaseId path line author { login } body } } } } } } }'
+```
+
+This is not a primary source for actionable review feedback. It is only for mapping inline comments to resolvable thread IDs.
+
+Recommendation:
+
+- If the user only wants to **view/list/count** review feedback, this step is optional.
+- If the user may want to **resolve conversations**, doing this early is usually more convenient because you can map comment `databaseId` / `path` / `line` to thread IDs in one pass.
+
+#### 1. Fetch inline comments
+
+```bash
+gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/comments
+```
+
+Only keep records that satisfy all of the following:
+
+- `user.login` is `coderabbitai[bot]` or `coderabbitai`
+- `in_reply_to_id == null` (only top-level inline comments, not replies)
+
+This is the candidate set.
+
+#### 2. Fetch reviews to exclude review summaries / nitpicks
+
+```bash
+gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/reviews
+```
+
+Identify CodeRabbit review summaries. Common characteristics include:
+
+- `Actionable comments posted: N`
+- `Nitpick comments`
+- long summary text
+
+These review-level contents are **not the final result**. They are only used to help determine:
+
+- which items are summaries
+- which nitpicks should not be counted as actionable inline comments
+
+### Filtering rule
+
+The final goal of the CodeRabbit workflow is always:
+
+> **Top-level inline comments left by CodeRabbit in `pulls/<pr_number>/comments` that are neither nitpicks nor summaries**
+
+Important:
+
+- Treat CodeRabbit nitpicks as non-actionable by default.
+- Do not include nitpicks in counts, summaries, or resolution queues unless the user explicitly asks for nitpicks.
+
+In practice, do the following:
+
+1. Get CodeRabbit top-level inline comments from `pulls/<pr_number>/comments`
+2. Use `pulls/<pr_number>/reviews` to determine whether the PR contains nitpick summaries
+3. In the output, keep only the inline comments you confirm are actionable
+
+### Large output handling
+
+If the output of `gh api --paginate ...` is too large and gets truncated:
+
+1. Record the tool output file path
+2. Do not manually read through the entire large JSON blob
+3. Hand it off to `@explorer` to extract:
+   - CodeRabbit-authored comments
+   - the number of top-level inline comments
+   - each comment’s `path` / `line` / `body`
+
+### Resolving review conversations
+
+### Resolution policy
+
+When triaging review feedback, apply this rule:
+
+- If a comment will **not** be fixed, you may resolve the conversation after triage.
+- If a comment **will** be fixed, do **not** resolve it first — make the code change first, then resolve the conversation afterward.
+
+In short:
+
+- **won't fix / no code change** → triage, then resolve
+- **will fix / code change required** → fix first, then resolve
+
+If the user asks to resolve a CodeRabbit review conversation:
+
+1. Identify the target inline comment from the actionable comment list.
+2. Map that comment to its review thread ID via `reviewThreads` GraphQL data.
+   - Match using `databaseId` when possible.
+   - If needed, fall back to `path` + `line` + author login.
+3. Resolve the thread with GraphQL:
+
+```bash
+gh api graphql -f query='mutation { resolveReviewThread(input: {threadId: "<thread_id>"}) { thread { isResolved } } }'
+```
+
+Notes:
+
+- Resolve the **thread**, not the individual comment.
+- `pulls/<pr_number>/comments` remains the source of truth for identifying actionable inline comments.
+- `reviewThreads` is only for thread-level operations such as resolving conversations.
+
+## Codex Reviews
+
+“Real review feedback” is strictly defined as:
+
+- **inline review comments**
+- **not** the review summary card
+
+There is no need to analyze the comment content itself.
+
+### Important behavior differences from CodeRabbit
+
+- Codex review is **silent while running**.
+- Unlike CodeRabbit, Codex does **not** expose an in-progress PR check for review status.
+- While Codex is reviewing, the PR main conversation thread gets an `eyes` reaction from `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]`.
+- If Codex finds no issues, it may leave **no actionable inline comments** and instead react to the PR main conversation thread with `+1` (thumbs up).
+- If Codex finds issues, it may create inline review comments in `pulls/<pr_number>/comments` and a review summary card in `pulls/<pr_number>/reviews`.
+
+### Data sources
+
+The Codex workflow uses these sources:
+
+1. **PR review comments**
+
+   ```bash
+   gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/comments
+   ```
+
+   This is the authoritative source for actionable inline Codex comments.
+
+2. **PR reviews**
+
+   ```bash
+   gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/reviews
+   ```
+
+   This is used to identify the Codex review summary card such as `### 💡 Codex Review`. It is not the primary source of actionable inline feedback.
+
+3. **Issue comment reactions on the PR main thread**
+
+   First fetch the PR issue node / comments if needed:
+
+   ```bash
+   gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<pr_number>/comments
+   gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<pr_number>/reactions
+   ```
+
+   Use reactions on the PR main conversation thread only to detect Codex review state:
+
+   - `eyes` from `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]` → Codex review appears to be in progress
+   - `+1` from `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]` on the PR main thread → Codex reviewed and found no issues
+
+   These reactions are **status signals**, not actionable review feedback.
+
+Do not treat these as primary sources for actionable comments:
+
+- `gh pr view ...`
+- `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<pr_number>/comments`
+- `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<pr_number>/reactions`
+
+Reason: actionable Codex review feedback still lives in PR review comments, not in the PR issue timeline.
+
+### Workflow
+
+#### 1. Fetch inline comments
+
+```bash
+gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/comments
+```
+
+Only keep records that satisfy all of the following:
+
+- `user.login` is `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]`
+- `in_reply_to_id == null` (only top-level inline comments, not replies)
+
+This is the candidate set of actionable Codex comments.
+
+#### 2. Fetch reviews to identify the summary card
+
+```bash
+gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<pr_number>/reviews
+```
+
+Identify Codex review summaries. Common characteristics include:
+
+- `### 💡 Codex Review`
+- explanatory text such as `Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.`
+- “About Codex in GitHub” help text
+
+These review-level contents are **not the final result**. They are only used to understand whether Codex posted a review summary.
+
+#### 3. Optionally inspect PR main-thread reactions for status
+
+If the user asks whether Codex is still reviewing, or whether Codex finished with no findings, inspect reactions on the PR main thread.
+
+Interpret them as follows:
+
+- `eyes` by `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]` → likely still reviewing / review in progress
+- `+1` by `chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]` with no Codex inline comments → likely completed with no findings
+
+Do not count these reactions as review comments.
+
+### Filtering rule
+
+The final goal of the Codex workflow is always:
+
+> **Top-level inline comments left by Codex in `pulls/<pr_number>/comments`**
+
+In practice, do the following:
+
+1. Get Codex top-level inline comments from `pulls/<pr_number>/comments`
+2. Use `pulls/<pr_number>/reviews` only to recognize the summary card
+3. If there are no Codex inline comments, optionally inspect PR main-thread reactions to distinguish:
+   - still reviewing (`eyes`)
+   - reviewed with no findings (`+1`)
+   - no observable Codex activity
+
+### Large output handling
+
+If any `gh api --paginate ...` output is too large and gets truncated:
+
+1. Record the tool output file path
+2. Do not manually read through the entire large JSON blob
+3. Hand it off to `@explorer` to extract:
+   - Codex-authored inline comments
+   - the number of top-level inline comments
+   - each comment’s `path` / `line` / `body`

.dockerignore

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+node_modules
+dist
+.git
+.github
+.vscode
+*.md
+!README.md
+docs
+experiments
+.env
+.env.*
+!.env.example
+*.log
+.DS_Store
+coverage
+.turbo

.gitattributes

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+* text=auto eol=lf
+
+*.bat text eol=crlf
+*.cmd text eol=crlf
+*.ps1 text eol=crlf

.github/CODEOWNERS

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+/apps/api/migrations/** @mrcfps @PerishCode @nettee