openai/land
Land a PR by monitoring conflicts, resolving them, waiting for checks, and squash-merging when green; use when asked to land, merge, or shepherd a PR to completion.
npx skills add https://github.com/openai/symphony --skill land
unless blocked.
branches.
gh CLI is authenticated.commit skilland push with the push skill before proceeding.
pull skill to fetch/merge origin/main andresolve conflicts, then use the push skill to publish the updated branch.
fixes are handled before merging.
commit skill,push with the push skill, and re-run checks.
delete the branch using the PR title/body for the merge subject/body.
10. Context guard: Before implementing review feedback, confirm it does not
conflict with the user’s stated intent or task context. If it conflicts,
respond inline with a justification and ask the user before changing code.
11. Pushback template: When disagreeing, reply inline with: acknowledge +
rationale + offer alternative.
12. Ambiguity gate: When ambiguity blocks progress, use the clarification
flow (assign PR to current GH user, mention them, wait for response). Do not
implement until ambiguity is resolved.
without asking the user, but reply inline with your rationale.
13. Per-comment mode: For each review comment, choose one of: accept,
clarify, or push back. Reply inline (or in the issue thread for Codex
reviews) stating the mode before changing code.
14. Reply before change: Always respond with intended action before pushing
code changes (inline for review comments, issue thread for Codex reviews).
# Ensure branch and PR context
branch=$(git branch --show-current)
pr_number=$(gh pr view --json number -q .number)
pr_title=$(gh pr view --json title -q .title)
pr_body=$(gh pr view --json body -q .body)
# Check mergeability and conflicts
mergeable=$(gh pr view --json mergeable -q .mergeable)
if [ "$mergeable" = "CONFLICTING" ]; then
# Run the `pull` skill to handle fetch + merge + conflict resolution.
# Then run the `push` skill to publish the updated branch.
fi
# Preferred: use the Async Watch Helper below. The manual loop is a fallback
# when Python cannot run or the helper script is unavailable.
# Wait for review feedback: Codex reviews arrive as issue comments that start
# with "## Codex Review — <persona>". Treat them like reviewer feedback: reply
# with a `[codex]` issue comment acknowledging the findings and whether you're
# addressing or deferring them.
while true; do
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/"$pr_number"/comments \
--jq '.[] | select(.body | startswith("## Codex Review")) | .id' | rg -q '.' \
&& break
sleep 10
done
# Watch checks
if ! gh pr checks --watch; then
gh pr checks
# Identify failing run and inspect logs
# gh run list --branch "$branch"
# gh run view <run-id> --log
exit 1
fi
# Squash-merge (remote branches auto-delete on merge in this repo)
gh pr merge --squash --subject "$pr_title" --body "$pr_body"
Preferred: use the asyncio watcher to monitor review comments, CI, and head
updates in parallel:
python3 .codex/skills/land/land_watch.py
Exit codes:
gh pr checks and gh run view --log, thenfix locally, commit with the commit skill, push with the push skill, and
re-run the watch.
timeout on only one platform), you may proceed without fixing it.
trigger a fresh CI run. Detect the updated PR head, pull locally, merge
origin/main if needed, add a real author commit, and force-push to retrigger
CI, then restart the checks loop.
remediation is to fetch latest origin/main, merge, force-push, and rerun CI.
UNKNOWN, wait and re-check.## Codex Review — <persona> issue comments (not job status) as the signal
that review feedback is available.
skip tests.
avoid redundant merges; re-run the formatter locally if needed and
git push --force-with-lease.
start with ## Codex Review — <persona> and include the reviewer’s
methodology + guardrails used. Treat these as feedback that must be
acknowledged before merge.
resolved) before requesting a new review or merging.
(batching is fine) before closing the thread.
gh api and reply with a prefixed comment. gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<pr_number>/comments
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<pr_number>/comments
gh api -X POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<pr_number>/comments \
-f body='[codex] <response>' -F in_reply_to=<comment_id>
in_reply_to must be the numeric review comment id (e.g., 2710521800), notthe GraphQL node id (e.g., PRRC_...), and the endpoint must include the PR
number (/pulls/<pr_number>/comments).
insufficient scope; verify by listing comments first.
[codex].thread) with [codex] and state whether you will address the feedback now or
defer it (include rationale).
([codex] ...) as an inline reply to the original review comment using
the review comment endpoint and in_reply_to (do not use issue comments for
this).
[codex] ...) in the same placeyou acknowledged the feedback (issue comment for Codex reviews, inline reply
for review comments).
newer [codex] issue comment is posted acknowledging the findings.
commits). Do not request one without changes since the last review.
there are zero outstanding review comments (all have [codex] inline
replies).
synchronization (or you can re-run the workflow manually). Post a concise
root-level summary comment so reviewers have the latest delta:
[codex] Changes since last review:
- <short bullets of deltas>
Commits: <sha>, <sha>
Tests: <commands run>
previous request.
just the most recent fix.
it. You can accept, defer, or decline feedback. If deferring or declining,
call it out in the root-level [codex] update with a brief reason (e.g.,
out-of-scope, conflicts with intent, unnecessary).
to defer or decline a correctness concern, validate first and explain why the
concern does not apply.
clarification, scope.
reasoning) before closing it.
update.
batch of fixes instead of many small updates.
to appease review).
Take openai/land from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.