Address Feedback

Use this skill when the user shares a feedback document, issue, thread, or pasted notes and asks you to address the feedback.

The default posture is judgment plus action: fix clear, verified bugs you agree with; propose UX changes with rationale; skip or flag low-signal, unclear, or out-of-scope items.

Prerequisites

• If no link or feedback text is provided, ask for it.
• Read the repo AGENTS.md before touching code.
• Use the relevant connector/plugin/skill for the source when available, instead of scraping authenticated pages.

Steps

1. Read the feedback source.

   Source	Reader
   Notion link	Notion connector or Notion skill
   Google Docs/Drive link	Google Drive connector or Google Docs skill
   Linear link	Linear connector if installed; otherwise ask for pasted content
   GitHub issue or PR	GitHub connector or gh issue view / gh pr view
   Slack thread	Slack connector
   Public URL	Web browsing
   Pasted text	Read directly

   Use web browsing only for public URLs. Auth-gated docs usually need their matching connector.

2. Categorize every actionable item.

   • Bug: Broken behavior, crash, wrong data, dead link, package/API mismatch, or captured exception. Verify and fix when you agree.
   • UX suggestion: Design, discoverability, workflow, or feature feedback. Propose the cleanest version first unless the user explicitly asked you to implement UX changes.
   • Question or unclear: Missing detail, contradictory feedback, or behavior you cannot inspect. Ask or flag it.
   • Out of scope: Outside this repo, already shipped, intentionally unsupported, or too low-signal. Note briefly and skip.

3. Check Sentry when the feedback smells like an error.

   • Use the Sentry skill/plugin if available, or the repo's Sentry scripts if documented.
   • Search by route, stack symbol, error text, and symptom keywords.
   • Default org is builder-io unless the user specifies another.
   • Cite issue IDs or links when you find a match.
   • If nothing matches, say that plainly.

4. Fix only the clear bugs you agree with.

   • Verify before fixing: reproduce locally, read the relevant code, inspect logs, or confirm with a stack trace.
   • Keep each fix narrow and mapped to a feedback item.
   • Follow existing project conventions and nearby patterns.
   • Do not switch branches, stash, reset, force-push, or open a PR unless the user asks.
   • Add or update focused tests when the bug risk warrants it.

5. Treat UX feedback with restraint.

   Do not solve UX problems by adding more visible controls, helper text, banners, top-level nav, or always-open panels by default. Prefer cleaner interaction models:

   • Make the existing primary action more discoverable.
   • Remove competing elements so the right action stands out.
   • Move secondary actions into DropdownMenu, Popover, Sheet, Collapsible, or tabs.
   • Improve empty states around one clear action.
   • Use progressive disclosure for optional or advanced controls.

   When proposing a UX change, write it as: what to change, why it helps, and the tradeoff. Keep each proposal short.

6. Verify changed behavior.

   • Run the smallest relevant test or typecheck command.
   • For UI fixes, inspect the actual screen with a browser tool you already have. Do not write a browser-automation script to check a small fix.
   • If you cannot run a useful verification, say why.

Report Format

Keep the final report short:

## Bugs Fixed
- [feedback item] - [what changed, file:line]

## Bugs Flagged But Not Fixed
- [feedback item] - [why]

## UX Suggestions
- [feedback item] -> [proposed change]

## Skipped
- [feedback item] - [reason]

Only include sections that have content. The user can read the diff; do not write a second feedback document.

Avoid

• Do not agree with every suggestion by default.
• Do not bundle unrelated cleanups.
• Do not implement UX changes that make an important screen busier without explicit user approval.
• Do not claim a UI change is done without browser verification when a local app can be run.
• Do not invent Sentry matches, affected users, or reproduction steps.

Related Skills

• github:gh-address-comments for GitHub PR review threads.
• github:gh-fix-ci for failing GitHub checks.
• sentry:sentry for production error investigation.
• frontend-design for approved UI implementation work.
• qa for broader browser verification.