Your pipeline posts a readable markdown summary of review findings on each PR. The prompt already lists the four elements every finding needs: location, issue, severity, and suggested fix. Even so, some findings omit the line, others are long paragraphs, and many suggested fixes are vague ("consider refactoring this"). What is the most effective way to get consistent, actionable findings?

Answer: D — Add a few example findings to the prompt that show the exact format, each with a precise location and a concrete, specific suggested fix.

When detailed instructions alone give inconsistent results, few-shot examples are the most effective way to get consistently formatted, actionable output. Section 6 specifically mentions examples showing location, issue, severity, and suggested fix. (a) adds more of the instructions that already aren't working. (b) misreads the symptom: the findings are inconsistent, not cut off. (c) breaks each finding into pieces handled separately and multiplies cost.