CCAR-F scenarios › Claude Code for Continuous Integration · Question 42 of 60
Scenario 5 · Claude Code for Continuous Integration
Claude Code runs inside your CI/CD pipeline. It reviews pull requests automatically, proposes test cases, and posts feedback on the PR. The central challenge is writing prompts and configuration that produce actionable findings while keeping false positives low enough that developers keep trusting the output.
Claude Code Configuration & Workflows
The CI review job re-runs on every push to an open pull request. Developers complain that each run re-posts findings they have already fixed or acknowledged, so a PR with five pushes collects dozens of near-duplicate comments. What change best addresses this?
Show answer and explanation
Answer: C — Include the prior review's findings in context and instruct Claude to report only issues that are new or still unaddressed after the latest commits.
Section 6 calls for including prior review findings in context when re-running after new commits and reporting only new or still-unaddressed issues. Claude can then tell which earlier findings were fixed. (a) misses any finding that is worded differently on the next run. (b) loses findings that come from how new and old code interact, and it can't tell whether earlier issues were resolved. (d) gives up reviewing later commits entirely.
More from this scenario
- A nightly CI job asks Claude Code to propose new unit tests for recently changed…
- Tests generated in CI are often low value, such as getter checks and assertions that a…
- Your pipeline has Claude Code generate a fix for a failing build and then, in the same…
- Select two. Developers say the automated PR review flags too many non-issues, such as…
- Your review flags issues in four categories: security, correctness bugs, performance…