💭 Clarifying file inspection I need to inspect the file closely since it doesn't create or consume Effect service; it only imports pure type exceptions. I found no issues, so everything seems clear. I wonder if I need to present the summary exactly as it is? The entirety of what the customer sees isn't meant to be literal due to its structure, so I’ll possibly use a success title like "All Clear" along with a summary that states "All Clear."

1. browse_code — Review apps/server/src/cli/updateProgress.ts at PR head specifically for whether it creates, moves, refactors, or consumes an Effect service, and identify any violations of Effect service conventions in its changed lines. Brief answer only.

2. modify_pr — All clear

💭 Confirming review process I’m wondering if the review was only needed for the findings. It seems like I posted everything unnecessarily, while the user indicated that when there are no findings, the final should be exactly that — just the final, without needing an additional post. I think I should clarify this process because it feels like there might have been a miscommunication about what to include when there's no action required.

3. modify_pr — PATCH repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/comments/* — rejected: body must be a single valid JSON object — do not double-encode, concatenate, or wrap the JSON. Correct example: {"body": "comment text"}