Add tutorial for using Copilot code review across the PR lifecycle (#62054)

Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: vgrl <vgrl@github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ria Gopu <ria-gopu@github.com>
Co-authored-by: Sophie <29382425+sophietheking@users.noreply.github.com>

Author: 4 people

content/copilot/tutorials/index.md

@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ children:
   - /budgets
   - /spark
   - /customize-code-review
+  - /use-copilot-code-review-across-the-pull-request-lifecycle
   - /enhance-agent-mode-with-mcp
   - /compare-ai-models
   - /speed-up-development-work

content/copilot/tutorials/use-copilot-code-review-across-the-pull-request-lifecycle.md

@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+---
+title: Use GitHub Copilot code review across the pull request lifecycle
+shortTitle: Pull request lifecycle
+allowTitleToDifferFromFilename: true
+intro: Build a repeatable workflow for {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} from draft pull request to merge.
+versions:
+  feature: copilot
+contentType: tutorials
+category:
+  - Accelerate PR velocity
+  - Team collaboration
+  - Author and optimize with Copilot
+---
+
+## Introduction
+
+{% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} is most effective when you use it as part of a pull request workflow. This tutorial shows how to choose between manual and automatic reviews, request reviews early on draft pull requests, and decide when to trigger re-review before merge.
+
+You will also learn when to use customization, skills, MCP servers, and runner options to tailor {% data variables.product.prodname_copilot_short %}'s reviews to your needs.
+
+## Work through the pull request lifecycle
+
+Choose a review model and set up early feedback for draft and active pull requests.
+
+### Choose the right review model for your team
+
+{% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} can run manually, when you trigger it yourself, or automatically, at one or more points in a pull request's lifecycle. Manual reviews give you control over exactly when {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} weighs in. Automatic reviews ensure consistent coverage, and you can choose whether they trigger on open, on draft, or on every new push.
+
+| Review model | Best for | Why |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Manual review request | High-context changes or selective use | You can trigger {% data variables.product.prodname_copilot_short %} only when you want another perspective. |
+| Automatic review on open pull requests | Teams that want broad, consistent coverage | Every pull request gets baseline feedback without relying on individual habits. |
+| Automatic review on draft pull requests | Teams that want earlier feedback loops | Authors can fix issues before human review starts. |
+| Automatic review on new pushes | Fast-moving pull requests with multiple revisions | {% data variables.product.prodname_copilot_short %} reevaluates substantial updates as the pull request evolves. |
+
+For setup steps, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/how-tos/use-copilot-agents/request-a-code-review/use-code-review) and [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/how-tos/copilot-on-github/set-up-copilot/configure-automatic-review).
+
+### Use {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} early on draft pull requests
+
+Reviewing draft pull requests with {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} gives you an early, dependable check on your code before you request a review from your team.
+
+A useful draft workflow is:
+
+1. Open a pull request as draft.
+1. Request a review from {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} under **Reviewers**, or enable automatic review for draft pull requests.
+1. Address high-confidence feedback first, such as correctness, security, and clear maintainability issues.
+1. Push updates and confirm that major comments have been resolved.
+1. Mark the pull request as ready for human review.
+
+This approach helps your team spend more human review time on design tradeoffs and product impact, instead of obvious issues that could have been caught earlier.
+
+## Tune review quality
+
+Improve review quality by deciding when to request re-review and where customization, external context, and runners add value.
+
+### Use re-review before merge
+
+After substantial changes, request re-review to check whether new risks were introduced while addressing earlier feedback.
+
+Request re-review when you:
+
+* Update multiple files across service or package boundaries.
+* Change security-sensitive or data-sensitive behavior.
+* Apply a large batch of suggested changes and want a final pass.
+
+For teams with frequent updates to active pull requests, enabling automatic reviews on new pushes can reduce manual re-review requests while keeping feedback current.
+
+### Match customization to your workflow
+
+Customization is most useful when each file type supports a review decision point in your workflow:
+
+* Use `.github/copilot-instructions.md` for repository-wide review expectations that should apply to most pull requests.
+* Use `.github/instructions/**/*.instructions.md` for agent-specific and path-specific guidance when different parts of the codebase have different standards.
+* Use `AGENTS.md` to provide repository context that improves relevance, such as intentional patterns, architecture boundaries, or review priorities.
+
+Keep these files focused on what reviewers need to decide during pull requests. Avoid turning them into full engineering handbooks.
+
+For detailed customization mechanics and examples, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/tutorials/customize-code-review).
+
+### Use agent skills and MCP servers for specialized review goals
+
+Agent skills and MCP servers are most valuable when your team needs reviews that depend on organization-specific context.
+
+Use agent skills when you want reusable review routines, for example:
+
+* Applying a standard checklist to migration pull requests.
+* Running language- or framework-specific review passes in a monorepo.
+* Prioritizing certain risk areas, such as authorization or billing logic.
+
+Use MCP servers when reviews should reference context outside the pull request itself, for example:
+
+* Linking pull request changes to issue, incident, or service ownership data.
+* Checking expected rollout or operational context from internal systems.
+* Validating implementation details against external documentation sources.
+
+For setup details, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/how-tos/copilot-on-github/customize-copilot/customize-cloud-agent/add-skills) and [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/how-tos/copilot-on-github/customize-copilot/configure-mcp-servers).
+
+### Decide whether you need self-hosted runners
+
+In many cases, standard {% data variables.product.prodname_dotcom %}-hosted runners are sufficient for {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} and require no setup; they are configured for you by default.
+
+Consider self-hosted or larger runners when you need:
+
+* Better performance for heavier review workloads.
+* Network access to internal systems required by your organization.
+
+Runners are required because {% data variables.copilot.copilot_code-review_short %} uses {% data variables.product.prodname_actions %} for agentic operations, such as deeper context gathering and tool-calling. If {% data variables.product.prodname_dotcom %}-hosted runners are unavailable and no supported self-hosted option is configured correctly, reviews will fall back to a more limited mode.
+
+For planning and setup details, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/how-tos/copilot-on-github/set-up-copilot/configure-runners).
+
+## Recommended workflows by scenario
+
+| Team scenario | Recommended workflow |
+| --- | --- |
+| Small team with frequent pull requests | Enable automatic reviews for all pull requests, review drafts for early feedback, and use manual re-review before merge when changes are substantial. |
+| Large monorepo with mixed stacks | Enable automatic reviews and review new pushes, add path-specific instructions for each major area, and use skills for repeated review patterns. |
+| Security-sensitive or regulated codebase | Use draft pull request reviews plus required re-review before merge, keep repository-wide security expectations in `.github/copilot-instructions.md`, and use MCP servers for incident or compliance context stored outside of GitHub. |
+| Team with internal platform dependencies | Start with automatic review, then add self-hosted runners and MCP context only when internal-system access is required for useful review feedback. |
+
+## Next steps
+
+* For broader concepts, including review effort and agentic capabilities, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/concepts/agents/code-review).
+* To tune automated review quality for specific repositories, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/tutorials/optimize-code-reviews).
+* For excluded file types and other limits, see [AUTOTITLE](/copilot/reference/review-excluded-files).