docs: clarify bot review conversation ownership (#39942)

* docs: clarify bot review conversations

.github/pull_request_template.md

@@ -87,6 +87,13 @@ What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:
 - Edge cases checked:
 - What you did **not** verify:
 
+## Review Conversations
+
+- [ ] I replied to or resolved every bot review conversation I addressed in this PR.
+- [ ] I left unresolved only the conversations that still need reviewer or maintainer judgment.
+
+If a bot review conversation is addressed by this PR, resolve that conversation yourself. Do not leave bot review conversation cleanup for maintainers.
+
 ## Compatibility / Migration
 
 - Backward compatible? (`Yes/No`)

AGENTS.md

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 - GitHub comment footgun: never use `gh issue/pr comment -b "..."` when body contains backticks or shell chars. Always use single-quoted heredoc (`-F - <<'EOF'`) so no command substitution/escaping corruption.
 - GitHub linking footgun: don’t wrap issue/PR refs like `#24643` in backticks when you want auto-linking. Use plain `#24643` (optionally add full URL).
 - PR landing comments: always make commit SHAs clickable with full commit links (both landed SHA + source SHA when present).
+- PR review conversations: if a bot leaves review conversations on your PR, address them and resolve those conversations yourself once fixed. Leave a conversation unresolved only when reviewer or maintainer judgment is still needed; do not leave bot-conversation cleanup to maintainers.
 - GitHub searching footgun: don't limit yourself to the first 500 issues or PRs when wanting to search all. Unless you're supposed to look at the most recent, keep going until you've reached the last page in the search
 - Security advisory analysis: before triage/severity decisions, read `SECURITY.md` to align with OpenClaw's trust model and design boundaries.
 

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -74,8 +74,19 @@ Welcome to the lobster tank! 🦞
 - Ensure CI checks pass
 - Keep PRs focused (one thing per PR; do not mix unrelated concerns)
 - Describe what & why
+- Reply to or resolve bot review conversations you addressed before asking for review again
 - **Include screenshots** — one showing the problem/before, one showing the fix/after (for UI or visual changes)
 
+## Review Conversations Are Author-Owned
+
+If a review bot leaves review conversations on your PR, you are expected to handle the follow-through:
+
+- Resolve the conversation yourself once the code or explanation fully addresses the bot's concern
+- Reply and leave it open only when you need maintainer or reviewer judgment
+- Do not leave "fixed" bot review conversations for maintainers to clean up for you
+
+This applies to both human-authored and AI-assisted PRs.
+
 ## Control UI Decorators
 
 The Control UI uses Lit with **legacy** decorators (current Rollup parsing does not support
@@ -101,8 +112,9 @@ Please include in your PR:
 - [ ] Note the degree of testing (untested / lightly tested / fully tested)
 - [ ] Include prompts or session logs if possible (super helpful!)
 - [ ] Confirm you understand what the code does
+- [ ] Resolve or reply to bot review conversations after you address them
 
-AI PRs are first-class citizens here. We just want transparency so reviewers know what to look for.
+AI PRs are first-class citizens here. We just want transparency so reviewers know what to look for. If you are using an LLM coding agent, instruct it to resolve bot review conversations it has addressed instead of leaving them for maintainers.
 
 ## Current Focus & Roadmap 🗺