Fix isOwnAddress method in wallet composable #519
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| name: Claude Code | |
| on: | |
| issue_comment: | |
| types: [created] | |
| pull_request_review_comment: | |
| types: [created] | |
| pull_request_target: | |
| types: [opened, ready_for_review] | |
| issues: | |
| types: [opened, assigned] | |
| pull_request_review: | |
| types: [submitted] | |
| jobs: | |
| claude: | |
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | |
| permissions: | |
| contents: write | |
| pull-requests: write | |
| issues: write | |
| id-token: write | |
| actions: read | |
| steps: | |
| - name: Checkout repository | |
| uses: actions/checkout@v5 | |
| with: | |
| fetch-depth: 1 | |
| - name: Run Claude Code | |
| id: claude | |
| uses: anthropics/claude-code-action@v1 | |
| with: | |
| claude_code_oauth_token: ${{ secrets.CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN }} | |
| github_token: ${{ secrets.PAT_TOKEN }} | |
| track_progress: true | |
| claude_args: | | |
| --model claude-opus-4-5-20251101 | |
| prompt: | | |
| Perform an exhaustive, deep review of this pull request. | |
| ## Analysis Depth | |
| - Trace every code path introduced or modified | |
| - Examine how changes interact with existing code across the entire codebase | |
| - Consider all edge cases, race conditions, and failure modes | |
| - Analyze security implications thoroughly (injection, XSS, authentication, cryptographic concerns) | |
| ## Bug Verification Protocol | |
| CRITICAL: Before reporting ANY potential bug, you MUST: | |
| 1. Read and understand ALL related code files, not just the changed lines | |
| 2. Trace the full execution flow from entry point to completion | |
| 3. Check if existing code already handles the case you're concerned about | |
| 4. Verify your assumptions by examining actual usage patterns in the codebase | |
| 5. Consider whether the behavior is intentional based on project context | |
| 6. Only report if you have HIGH CONFIDENCE after this verification | |
| Do NOT report speculative issues. If uncertain, investigate deeper rather than flagging a false alarm. | |
| ## Review Focus | |
| - Logic correctness and algorithmic soundness | |
| - State management and data flow integrity | |
| - Error handling completeness | |
| - Resource management (memory, connections, handles) | |
| - Concurrency safety | |
| - API contract adherence | |
| - Performance implications at scale | |
| ## Feedback Format | |
| When providing feedback, ALWAYS include: | |
| 1. A concise explanation of the issue or improvement opportunity | |
| 2. A code snippet showing the suggested fix or improvement | |
| 3. Brief reasoning for why the change is beneficial | |
| Use GitHub's suggestion syntax for inline code changes: | |
| ```suggestion | |
| // improved code here | |
| ``` | |
| This allows the PR author to apply your suggestions directly with one click. | |
| Quality over quantity - every comment should be valuable, verified, and actionable with concrete code. |