Week Two: Copilot Code Review [Copilot Skills Challenge]

[queenofcorgis]

Alt text: Copilot Skills Challenge Week Two banner with the Copilot mascot on a geometric landscape, promoting the second week of the GitHub Copilot learning challenge.

Welcome to part two of the GitHub Copilot Skills Series! This week, we’ll leverage GitHub Copilot code review to promote code quality and catch issues before they reach production.

Missed last week? Head to Part One and then join us back here.

Step One: Skills Exercise 💪

To begin, complete the GitHub Copilot Code Review exercise where you’ll learn how to use GitHub Copilot for automated code reviews, customize review criteria, and set up automatic reviews

Then, come back for part two to deepen your learning with our challenge and be entered to win a GitHub Shop Voucher!

Step Two: Community Challenge 🧠

Answer these multiple choice questions in the comments section:

Question One: Which Copilot feature can assist you in writing clearer code review comments?
a) Suggest code comments
b) Generate docstrings
c) Suggest edits and questions based on the changed code
d) All of the above

Question Two: Copilot suggests a significant refactor to a core function, affecting its inputs and outputs in ways not documented in the original pull request. What actions should you take as a reviewer?
a) Carefully review the Copilot-suggested changes, and if the implementation appears sound, approve and merge the pull request; leave it to future contributors to update related documentation or tests as needed.
b) Schedule a meeting with the author to discuss the refactor and its broader implications; wait for input from other team members before making any review decisions.
c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.
d) Comment on the refactor, recommending the author revert to the original function structure unless the changes are justified with benchmarking data or formal design approval, then proceed only if those are provided.

Question Three: Copilot generates a code comment suggesting error handling for a function that currently has none. What should you do with this suggestion?
a) Ignore the comment since the function already works as intended
b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling
c) Automatically add error handling as suggested without involving the author
d) Remove the suggestion if it wasn’t part of the author’s original changes

Question Four: When using Copilot to add code review comments, what is the best way to ensure your feedback is helpful to the contributor?

a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning
b) Write as many comments as possible to cover all potential issues
c) Use copy-pasted comments for consistency
d) Avoid suggestions unless there is a critical bug

Question Five; When should you rely solely on Copilot-generated review comments without further investigation?

a) Only when the code author is highly experienced
b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis
c) Whenever Copilot highlights a possible error
d) Anytime Copilot's comments match your initial impression

We’ll be sharing the answers in the comments on Monday 🧠

Use the discussion below to share additional resources, ask questions for our team to answer, and respond to the challenge.

**No Purchase Necessary. Open only to Github community members 14+. Game ends February 17, 2026. For details, see Official rules.

[ijklim]

Anyone else encountered a discrepancy in Step 4: Automate Reviews? An unresolved Copilot review does not seem to block merging the PR, even with Require conversation resolution before merging set to true, and target branch set to main.

According to Perplexity: "The reason the merge is not blocked is that GitHub’s 'Require conversation resolution before merging' only evaluates conversations created as part of reviews that count toward required reviews, and Copilot’s review does not count because the app does not have write access and is explicitly excluded from mergeability checks ('Only reviews by reviewers with write access count toward mergeability')".

I tried adding a comment under Files changed and selecting Start a review. That did manage to block the merge if that comment was unresolved.

Copilot review is unresolved and the PR can be merged

[ijklim]

@arilivigni @chriswblake Thanks for checking! The evolving AI landscape definitely keeps us on our toes. Even as a daily user for the past year, these exercises have been great for picking up new tricks—I specifically enjoyed diving deeper into staged vs. unstaged code reviews and using slash commands directly from the prompt.

Great work to the team for putting this together!

[arilivigni]

Thank you so much for the kind words and things do evolve daily and keeps us on our toes 🤣

[chriswblake]

Interestingly, for me, it still blocks from merging if I have unresolved conversations, even if they are from Copilot.

Before clicking Resolve button

After clicking Resolve button

Ruleset config

[ijklim]

@chriswblake Highly unusual, digging further. I compared the ruleset settings for both repositories; they are more or less the same.

To perform another test, I deliberately introduced text with bad contrast to trigger WCAG warning. Glad to report Automatically request Copilot code review works as expected. Notice that while Copilot is performing code review, "Merge Pull Request" is enabled. IRL, this probably isn't a problem, since Required approvals should be set to 1 or more.

Surprisingly, merging is blocked after Copilot finishes the review and adds feedback. I asked Perplexity/Comet, and it admitted that it was wrong before. I will report back again if I manage to create another branch with the earlier behavior.

[arilivigni]

@chriswblake if you look at the internal thread I think this is related to a FF for some people and it not being communicated.

[ghostinhershell]

Missed Week 1? Check that out here! Week One: Customize Your GitHub Copilot Experience [Copilot Skills Challenge]

[fdescamps]

Step 2) dcbab

[Deepakkarn56]

Question One: d) All of the above

Question Two: c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three: b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four: a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five: b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[AS1SA]

Q/1: d

Q/2: c

Q/3: b

Q/4: a

Q/5: b
❤️😎👊

[vaghaniparth]

Week Two => D C B A B

[panditsumit]

hey guys, this needs pro subscription which I don't have , how to continue ?

[Ede1994]

D C B A B

[Nilusha-RN]

Q1: d
Q2: c
Q3: b
Q4: a
Q5: b

My rule: Copilot suggests, I verify—especially for refactors, security, and edge cases.

[MadDips]

for me the copilot reviewer not coming(My account is corporate one)

[Udai-Senevirathne]

D
C
B
A
B

[saiteja492]

1.d
2.c
3.b
4.a
5.b

[WojakGra]

Question One: Which Copilot feature can assist you in writing clearer code review comments?

c) Suggest edits and questions based on the changed code

Question Two: Copilot suggests a significant refactor to a core function, affecting its inputs and outputs in ways not documented in the original pull request. What actions should you take as a reviewer?

c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three: Copilot generates a code comment suggesting error handling for a function that currently has none. What should you do with this suggestion?

b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four: When using Copilot to add code review comments, what is the best way to ensure your feedback is helpful to the contributor?

a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five; When should you rely solely on Copilot-generated review comments without further investigation?

b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[yuvraj707sharma]

Question One: Which Copilot feature can assist you in writing clearer code review comments?
Answer: Suggest edits and questions based on the changed code
Question Two: Copilot suggests a significant refactor to a core function, affecting its inputs and outputs in ways not documented in the original pull request. What actions should you take as a reviewer?
Answer: Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.
Question Three: Copilot generates a code comment suggesting error handling for a function that currently has none. What should you do with this suggestion?
Answer: Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling
Question Four: When using Copilot to add code review comments, what is the best way to ensure your feedback is helpful to the contributor?
Answer: Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning
Question Five; When should you rely solely on Copilot-generated review comments without further investigation?
Answer: Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis.

[MadDips]

Question One: Which Copilot feature can assist you in writing clearer code review comments?
answer - d) All of the above

Question Two: Copilot suggests a significant refactor to a core function, affecting its inputs and outputs in ways not documented in the original pull request. What actions should you take as a reviewer?
Answer - c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three: Copilot generates a code comment suggesting error handling for a function that currently has none. What should you do with this suggestion?
Answer - b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four: When using Copilot to add code review comments, what is the best way to ensure your feedback is helpful to the contributor?
Answer - a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five; When should you rely solely on Copilot-generated review comments without further investigation?
Answer - b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[MOHAMED-MUHNI]

Question One: d) All of the above
Question Two: c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess impact, raise questions, and recommend updating documentation/tests
Question Three: b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider error handling
Question Four: a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning
Question Five: b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions should be considered alongside your own analysis

[jatinkumar11954]

Q 1: d) All of the above
Q2 : c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess impact, raise questions, and recommend updating documentation/tests
Q3 : b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider error handling
Q4 : a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning
Q5 : b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions should be considered alongside your own analysis

[queenofcorgis]

The answers are in! We're halfway through - thanks everyone for doing such great work 🚀

Answers:

Details

Question One: Which Copilot feature can assist you in writing clearer code review comments? c) Suggest edits and questions based on the changed code

Question Two: Copilot suggests a significant refactor to a core function, affecting its inputs and outputs in ways not documented in the original pull request. What actions should you take as a reviewer?
c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three: Copilot generates a code comment suggesting error handling for a function that currently has none. What should you do with this suggestion?
b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four: When using Copilot to add code review comments, what is the best way to ensure your feedback is helpful to the contributor?
a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five; When should you rely solely on Copilot-generated review comments without further investigation?
b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[Sherman95]

✅ Copilot Code Review – Community Challenge

Question One:
d) All of the above

Question Two:
c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three:
b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four:
a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five:
b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[PereraMadhushani]

Question One:
d) All of the above

Question Two:
c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three:
b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four:
a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five:
b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[ghostinhershell]

Hey y'all, thanks so much to everyone who has participated so far! And if you haven't gotten a chance, it's not too late!

Our Week 3 post is now live! 🎉 Week Three: Modernize Your Legacy Code with GitHub Copilot [Copilot Skills Challenge]

[Tusharmaji135]

for me all check is done by coderabbit and also the resolve is done by him or copilot

Question One:
d) All of the above

Question Two:
c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.

Question Three:
b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling

Question Four:
a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning

Question Five:
b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[yuvraj707sharma]

How can we start week 3?

[ijklim]

@yuvraj707sharma Week 3 - https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/186361

[yuvraj707sharma]

Thanks

[JohnX4321]

d) All of the above
c) Review the Copilot-generated changes in detail, assess their impact on related code, and raise questions with the author about compatibility, documentation, and test coverage; recommend updating documentation or tests within the PR before approving.
b) Share the suggestion with the author, and ask them to consider adding appropriate error handling
a) Phrase suggestions in a respectful, constructive manner, and explain your reasoning
b) Never—Copilot’s suggestions are valuable but should be considered alongside your own analysis

[vikashkumar016]

🐞 Bug Buster's Code Review Challenge Submission

Question 1: d) All of the above
Question 2: c) Review changes in detail, assess impact, require documentation/tests
Question 3: b) Share suggestion with author, collaborate on error handling
Question 4: a) Phrase suggestions respectfully and explain reasoning
Question 5: b) Never—always verify Copilot suggestions with your own analysis

---

My Bug Buster Approach to Code Reviews:

I've customized Copilot as "Bug Buster" — a debugging-first assistant. During code reviews, I focus on:

✅ Error detection first — bugs before features
✅ Edge case verification — null checks, boundary conditions, array bounds
✅ Root cause explanation — understand why bugs happen
✅ Collaborative feedback — help authors learn from mistakes

Example Bug Buster Review Format:

[rupak-at]

Question 1) d)
Question 2) c)
Question 3) b)
Question 4) a)
Question 5) b)

[schneidergithub]

@queenofcorgis is week 3 challenge opening up soon?

[queenofcorgis]

@schneidergithub Week Three: Modernize Your Legacy Code with GitHub Copilot [Copilot Skills Challenge] 😄 Here you go!

[schneidergithub]

Thanks!

[sajjadnazaridev]

Hi, Here are my answers:
Q1: D – All of the above. Copilot can help with clearer comments, better docstrings, and smarter edit suggestions.
Q2: C – Review the changes carefully, assess their impact, and request documentation/tests updates before approving.
Q3: B – Share the suggestion with the author and discuss adding proper error handling.
Q4: A – Keep feedback respectful, constructive, and explain the reasoning.
Q5: B – Never rely solely on Copilot; its suggestions should complement your own review.

[sajjadnazaridev]

I have a technical question for the community of professional GitHub developers. As a junior front-end developer with GitHub Copilot Pro, how can I make meaningful progress in the front-end field and grow into a more skilled professional?