Fix invalid baseRepository field in push-pr-update skill

[igerber]

Summary

• Fix gh pr view --json baseRepository in push-pr-update skill, which fails because baseRepository is not a valid gh pr view JSON field
• Replace with gh repo view --json owner,name which correctly resolves the repository owner/name for posting AI review comments

Methodology references (required if estimator / math changes)

• N/A - no methodology changes (only .claude/commands/ skill file updated)

Validation

• Tests added/updated: No test changes (skill template file, not executable code)
• Manually verified gh repo view --json owner,name --jq '.owner.login + "/" + .name' returns correct owner/repo

Security / privacy

• Confirm no secrets/PII in this PR: Yes

---

Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

Overall assessment: ⚠️ Needs changes

Executive summary

• P1: The new gh repo view lookup returns the current repo, which can be a fork; AI review comments may target the wrong repo for fork‑based PRs. (.claude/commands/push-pr-update.md:L196-L205)
• No estimator/math/SE/identification or default‑behavior changes in this PR; Methodology Registry cross‑check not applicable.
• No tests updated.

Methodology

• No findings (change is limited to a CLI command doc; no estimator/method changes to cross‑check).

Code Quality

• Severity: P1. Impact: In fork workflows, gh repo view resolves the fork (current repo) rather than the PR base repo, so the review comment can be posted to the wrong repository or fail. Concrete fix: derive the base repository from the PR (e.g., gh pr view --json … if supported, or gh api/GraphQL to read .base.repo.full_name), and only fall back to gh repo view when the base repo can’t be resolved. (.claude/commands/push-pr-update.md:L196-L205)

Performance

• No findings.

Maintainability

• No findings.

Tech Debt

• No findings.

Security

• No findings.

Documentation/Tests

• No findings.