AI-Assisted Development

bestax uses AI in two ways: AI code review on every pull request, and an autonomous development loop that can implement maintainer-approved issues end to end. Every AI-authored change is clearly labeled, and a human maintainer reviews and merges everything — nothing is ever merged automatically.

For users: filing issues the AI can pick up

File issues normally — bug report, feature request, accessibility issue, and the other issue templates all work. During triage, a maintainer may add the claude-fix label to an issue. That kicks off the autonomous loop: Claude implements the fix on a branch, opens a pull request that references your issue (Fixes #N), and the AI reviewers iterate on it. You'll see the linked PR appear on your issue, and the issue closes automatically when a maintainer merges the PR.

The more actionable your issue, the better the agent does with it:

• Name the component (Button, Modal, useConfig, …) and the package (@allxsmith/bestax-bulma, create-bestax, docs).
• Show a minimal reproduction — a code snippet beats a description.
• State expected vs. actual behavior, with screenshots for visual issues.
• Mention your React/Bulma versions when they might matter.

For contributors: what reviews your PR

Every PR gets AI review before human review:

• CodeRabbit reviews automatically. Respond in-thread or just push fixes — it re-reviews each push and marks addressed comments with "✅ Addressed in commit …". If you think a finding is wrong, say so in the thread; a maintainer has the final word.
• @claude mentions are restricted to the owner, members, and invited collaborators (they spend the maintainer's Claude usage). External contributors don't need them — just push.
• Copilot review may also appear when the maintainers have it enabled.

A green AI review is not approval: a human maintainer still reviews and merges every PR, and the review-time requirements (Storybook story for UI changes, docs page for API changes, skills/ updates for component changes) still apply.

The autonomous loop

PRs authored by the loop move through a small label lifecycle:

Label	Where	Meaning
claude-fix	issues	Maintainer-approved: Claude implements this issue and opens a PR
ai-loop	PRs	The PR is inside the autonomous review/fix loop
needs-human-review	PRs	The loop converged (or hit a disagreement) — awaiting maintainer review/merge
ai-loop-paused	PRs	The loop hit its iteration cap or a guardrail — a maintainer must intervene
deep-review	PRs	Opt-in: a triage+ user applies it to run the Claude deep review on any PR (re-apply to re-run). Optionally steer it by pre-posting a PR comment starting with deep-review: (focus areas, suspected weak spots) — only comments from triage+ authors are used
ai-triage	PRs & issues	Runs one-shot AI triage (related issues + duplicates): automatic on new issues/PRs in auto mode (daily budget), or applied by a triage+ user (budget-exempt; label auto-removes)
claude-repro	issues	Triage+ user applies it: Claude drafts a candidate reproduction test and github-actions[bot] posts it for a human to run (author-only — CI does not run it). Auto-removes
needs-security-review	PRs & issues	Auto-applied by the security scanner when it flags an item; blocks every AI entry point — claude-repro, claude-fix, @claude and @bestaxbot — until a maintainer reviews and removes it
claude-assisted	PRs	Auto-applied provenance for AI-assisted PRs (bestaxbot or the Claude footer)
stale	PRs	Auto-applied after 30 days of inactivity; closes 14 days later unless activity resumes. Claude-assisted PRs skip this sweep — a separate closer sweeps them after 90 days instead
neverstale	PRs	Exempts a PR from all stale automation (both the 30/14-day sweep and the 90-day Claude-assisted closer)

AI triage

New issues and PRs can get an automatic triage comment: likely duplicates (issues), the open issues a PR probably resolves, and overlapping PRs. Triage comments are posted by the bestaxbot machine account (the same account that authors the loop's PRs; older triage comments were posted by github-actions[bot] or claude[bot]). Only same-repo PRs are triaged — PRs opened from forks are always skipped, automatic and label alike (the workflow deliberately avoids GitHub's pull_request_target trigger, so fork-originated events can never run with repository secrets); issues have no such restriction. Three repository variables control it:

• AI_TRIAGE_MODE — auto (new issues/PRs are triaged automatically and the label still works), label (opt-in only; the default when unset), or off (disables both automatic triage and the label).
• AI_TRIAGE_DAILY_LIMIT — maximum auto-triggered triage sessions per UTC day (default 10). The cap only meters outside authors: label-triggered runs are exempt (each one is already human-metered by the click), and so are issues/PRs opened by collaborators with triage access or higher (their role is verified live against the repository).
• AI_TRIAGE_AUTOCLOSE — on, dry-run, or off (the default). When active, an issue whose triage comment names a Duplicate of #N is auto-closed after 14 days — unless anyone objects: a human comment after the triage comment, a 👎 reaction on it, or reopening the issue each veto the close.

Reproduction (author-only)

A triage+ user can apply claude-repro to an issue to have Claude draft a minimal Jest reproduction test. github-actions[bot] posts the draft as a comment for a human to review and run — CI does not execute it. This is deliberately author-only; the token that pays for the model never shares a job with code execution, and the drafted (untrusted-influenced) test is posted with the workflow's own token, not bestaxbot's, so a stray @claude or marker in the draft cannot re-trigger anything. The whole pipeline holds no PAT. A flagged issue (needs-security-review) is refused until the flag is cleared.

Security scan

New issues and PRs are automatically assessed by a read-only Claude session for malicious code, prompt injection aimed at this repo's automation, and social engineering. When it flags an item, a deterministic step applies needs-security-review (the reason stays in the private run output, never a public comment). The scan holds no write tools and no PAT, so it has no channel to post or leak anything; it fails closed (a crashed or inconclusive scan flags rather than passes). Controls: AI_SCAN_MODE (off disables it) and AI_SCAN_DAILY_LIMIT (auto scans per UTC day, default 20); AI_LOOP_ENABLED=false stops it with everything else.

A clean verdict is advisory — it only covers the static text scanned at open time, so treat it as "nothing obvious at the moment it opened", not as a guarantee about later edits or comments.

A flag, though, is a gate: while needs-security-review is on an item, every AI entry point refuses it — claude-repro and claude-fix, and also @claude and @bestaxbot, which check the label in their job if:. So a flagged item cannot be investigated by mentioning the bot; inspect it by hand, and remove the label once you are satisfied. That is also the answer when @claude appears to ignore a mention: check for the label before assuming the workflow is broken.

The loop itself: Claude implements the issue and opens the PR → CodeRabbit reviews it and a second, independent Claude review (a stronger model than the implementer) does a deep pass → Claude addresses every finding, fixing what's right and refuting what's wrong → both reviewers re-verify their own findings against the pushed code (nothing is closed on the fixer's word alone) → after at most 4 fix rounds, the PR either converges (CI green, all review threads resolved) or is handed to a human with the open disagreements listed.

Screenshots at handoff. When the loop flips a PR to needs-human-review it also dispatches a screenshot pass (story-screenshots.yml): Playwright captures the Storybook stories affected by the PR's changed files — once light, once dark — and posts them to the PR as a single (upserted) comment plus a 30-day workflow artifact, so the reviewer sees the rendered result and not just the diff. The images are served from the story-screenshots branch, which is disposable storage — deleting it only breaks images in old handoff comments, and the next run re-creates it. To run the pass on any PR, apply the needs-human-review label yourself or dispatch it directly: gh workflow run story-screenshots.yml -f pr=123, with 123 swapped for your PR number. Cross-cutting changes (shared helpers, theme plumbing) map to no specific stories and produce an explicit "nothing to screenshot" comment. If the pass itself breaks, the same comment says so and links the failed run — a silent handoff always means there was nothing to show, never that the screenshots were lost.

Please don't add or remove the loop labels on PRs you don't own — they are the loop's state machine.

Guardrails

• Humans always merge. The loop cannot merge, enable auto-merge, or approve its own work; branch protection requires a human approval on main.
• Hard iteration cap (4 fix rounds per PR), plus concurrency limits so runs never stack.
• Protected paths: the loop refuses to operate on changes touching CI workflows, coverage thresholds, commitlint/release configuration, or dependency policy — the gates that keep it honest can't be edited by it.
• Maintainer-only entry: only collaborators with triage access or higher can start the loop (the workflow re-verifies the labeler's permission live), and only by labeling an issue after reading it.
• Kill switches: removing the ai-loop label stops one PR; a repository variable turns the whole system off.

Repository variables

Every switch above is a repository variable (Settings → Secrets and variables → Actions → Variables), not a secret. They are listed here because the workflows that read them are public in .github/workflows/, so the names and their effects are already readable — a control nobody can find is the only thing that would be worse. Values are never sensitive; secrets are a separate store and none are documented here.

Defaults matter more than the values, because an unset variable is not "off":

Variable	Unset means	Values	Controls
AI_LOOP_ENABLED	enabled	false disables	The master switch. false stops the loop, triage, repro and the security scan
AI_TRIAGE_MODE	label (opt-in only)	auto, label, off	Whether new issues/PRs are triaged automatically, by label only, or not at all
AI_TRIAGE_DAILY_LIMIT	10	integer	Auto-triage sessions per UTC day. Label runs and triage+ authors are exempt
AI_TRIAGE_AUTOCLOSE	off	on, dry-run, off	Whether a flagged duplicate is auto-closed after the objection window
AI_SCAN_MODE	enabled	off disables	The security scan on new issues/PRs
AI_SCAN_DAILY_LIMIT	20	integer	Auto scans per UTC day
AI_LOOP_COPILOT	off	true enables	Requests a Copilot review on loop PRs (Copilot's own automatic review skips bot-authored PRs on personal repos, so it has to be asked for)

Two of these are on when unset — AI_LOOP_ENABLED and AI_SCAN_MODE — so both spend Claude usage from the moment their workflows land. Set them to false / off before merging if you want to stage the rollout rather than disable it afterwards.

COPILOT_AGENT_FIREWALL_ENABLED and COPILOT_AGENT_FIREWALL_ALLOW_LIST_ADDITIONS may also appear in the variable list. They belong to GitHub's Copilot coding agent, are read by GitHub rather than by anything in .github/workflows/, and are unrelated to the automation described here.

AI-ready scaffolds

New apps can start AI-ready too: accepting the AI-skills prompt in npm create bestax@latest installs the bestax Agent Skills and a CLAUDE.md, plus a .claude/launch.json that tells Claude Code's browser preview how to start the app's dev server (npm run dev on port 5173, with --strictPort so a busy port fails loudly instead of silently drifting to another port). See the LLMs guide for the full AI tooling story.