Review Overleaf

Review Overleaf

Pull unresolved review threads from an Overleaf project, locate each in the local repo, propose edits the user reviews, and apply them. Does not push back to Overleaf — the web UI is still the place to mark threads resolved after the user verifies the local change.

Step 1: Resolve project ID

Accept any of:

• Raw 24-char hex ID (^[0-9a-f]{24}$)
• Full URL like https://www.overleaf.com/project/<id> — extract via regex
• Project name in quotes — call:

  bashCopy code
  python3 ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/overleaf_reviews.py --list-projects
  

  Each line is <24-hex> <accessLevel> <name>. Fuzzy-match the name. If multiple match, AskUserQuestion to disambiguate.

If the user has not given a project ID at all, run --list-projects and show the user the table so they can pick one.

Step 2: Cookie precheck

If ~/.claude/overleaf-skills/cookie does not exist, tell the user to "set up overleaf" (which triggers the setup skill) and stop.

If it exists but auth fails (the next script call returns a refresh hint), point at the same setup skill and stop.

Step 3: Access-level guard

If the project ID came from name resolution, check the matched entry's accessLevel. If readOnly, warn:

Project is read-only. You can edit local files but cannot sync them back to Overleaf via the web UI; you would need to copy-paste manually. Continue?

For owner, readAndWrite, or review, proceed silently.

Step 4: Fetch comments

bashCopy code
python3 ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/overleaf_reviews.py --json --repo . < project-id > --unresolved-only

Parses to a JSON array. Each record has: thread_id, doc_id, snippet, offset, resolved, messages (list of {user, ts, content}), file, line. The file and line are null when the snippet did not match any local *.tex.

Step 5: Edit loop

For each record where file is non-null:

1. Read the file at line ± 5 lines for context.
2. Summarize the comment thread in one sentence: who said what.
3. Propose a concrete edit grounded in the comment text. If the comment is a question (e.g., "did you mean X?"), the edit should answer it in the prose; if it's a correction (e.g., "wrong notation"), the edit should make the correction.
4. Apply via Edit. Do not batch — one comment, one edit, then move on.

Skip records where file is null (snippet did not map). Collect them in an <unmapped> list.

Step 6: Wrap up

After the loop:

1. Run git diff and show the user the full set of changes.
2. List the <unmapped> records (if any) with doc_id + snippet preview, so the user can hunt them manually.
3. Suggest a commit message in the style: address overleaf review: <one-line summary of the changes>. Do NOT auto-commit. The user can run /github-dev:commit-staged or commit by hand.
4. Remind the user to mark the addressed threads as resolved in the Overleaf web UI once they verify the local diff.

Non-goals

• No re-upload to Overleaf (no write API used).
• No thread resolution in Overleaf (web UI only).
• No .bib edits unless a comment specifically targets a citation.
• No multi-line snippets that span paragraph breaks — those land in <unmapped> for v1; the snippet matcher is line-anchored.

Pairs naturally with

• github-dev — /github-dev:commit-staged after the edit loop, /github-dev:create-pr if the project is collaborative.