auto-merge was automatically disabled: GitHub error

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

GitHub disables auto-merge when the PR's head changes in a way that invalidates the merge (new commits, base branch update, or a failing check). Fix whatever invalidated it, then re-enable auto-merge on the PR.

Error

Auto-merge was automatically disabled for this pull request.

Steps

1. Check the PR timeline for what happened after you enabled auto-merge: new pushes, base-branch updates, or a check failure. Expected: the invalidating event is visible.
2. Address it: if checks failed, fix them; if the base moved, update the branch. Expected: required checks are green again.
3. Re-enable auto-merge from the PR page. Expected: the auto-merge badge returns.
4. Leave the PR alone until it merges; any new push disables it again.

When to use

• The PR shows 'Auto-merge was automatically disabled'.
• You want the PR to merge as soon as checks pass.

When not to use

• Auto-merge was never enabled - enable it instead of debugging.
• A human disabled it deliberately; respect that and ask why.

Tool compatibility

• GitHub auto-merge (needs branch protection or just the toggle).
• Any CI.

Variant phrasings

Auto-merge disabled after every push

Expected behavior: each new head SHA re-validates; re-enable after the final push.

Auto-merge disabled with no visible cause

A required check went from pending to failing and back - check the checks timeline.

Why it happens

Auto-merge promises 'merge this exact head SHA once checks pass'. Anything that changes the head SHA or the check results voids that promise, so GitHub disables it rather than merging something you did not approve.

Edge cases

• Re-enabling auto-merge does not re-run checks; stale green checks on an old SHA still block correctly.
• If the repo requires linear history, auto-merge uses the configured merge method - confirm it matches your expectation.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_yk25cVlik838sqW8qj8idQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_yk25cVlik838sqW8qj8idQ

Thread query: auto-merge was automatically disabled: GitHub error

TL;DR: GitHub disables auto-merge when the PR's head changes in a way that invalidates the merge (new commits, base branch update, or a failing check). Fix whatever invalidated it, then re-enable auto-merge on the PR.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Your review agent started writing while the PR was open and hit submit after it closed or merged. Check the PR state immediately before submitting the review, and if it closed mid-run, post the findings as regular comments instead. The fix is a state check plus a graceful fallback, not a retry loop.

The query

"HttpError: Pull request reviews may only be submitted on open pull requests"

Use this when

• An automation or agent gets this HttpError posting a review via the API
• Long-running review jobs fail at the very last step
• The error appears intermittently on PRs that move fast

Not for

• Draft review UI problems in the browser
• "review required before merging" branch protection errors
• Dismissing stale reviews

Steps

1. Confirm the PR actually closed

gh pr view [number] --json state,mergedAt

Expected output: the real state, for example state: MERGED. If it says OPEN, keep reading - something else is wrong.

2. Add a state check right before the submit call

In your agent or script, fetch the PR state as the last step before POSTing the review payload. Never trust the state from when the review started.

Expected output: the submit path only runs when state is OPEN.

3. Fall back to issue comments when the PR is closed

Regular issue comments work on closed and merged PRs. Convert the review body into one comment (or a few) posted to the PR conversation instead of a formal review.

Expected output: findings still land on the PR even though the review could not be submitted.

4. Save the review draft locally before submitting

Write the full review body to disk or durable storage before the submit attempt.

Expected output: a failed submit never loses the agent's work.

5. Rule out the misleading-OPEN case

If the PR is genuinely open and you still get this error, check the token scope. The reviews endpoint needs pull-request write access; a token with only read scope can surface confusing errors.

Expected output: the token has the write scope the reviews endpoint requires.

Variant phrasings

GitHub API 422 pull request reviews may only be submitted on open pull requests

Same thing, one layer down. Octokit wraps the 422 in an HttpError. The state-check-plus-fallback fix is identical.

agent's review failed because the PR merged while it was working

The race in its purest form. Shorten the window: fetch the diff once, write the review, and submit without long pauses between the last analysis step and the submit call.

Why it happens

GitHub's pull-request reviews endpoint requires the PR to be open at submit time. Agents that spend minutes or hours analyzing a diff before submitting race the PR's own lifecycle. Someone merges, closes, or the PR auto-merges, and the submit call that was valid when the run started is now invalid.

Edge cases

• Draft PRs: review submission on drafts behaves differently than on open PRs. Handle drafts as their own case in the state check.
• Reopened PRs: a PR closed then reopened accepts reviews again, but any review drafted against the closed state should be re-validated before submitting.
• Dont hammer the state endpoint per comment. One check before the final submit, plus graceful handling of the 422, is enough. Per-comment checks just burn rate limit.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_HM0NED2emJBOztC0mdKOeQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_HM0NED2emJBOztC0mdKOeQ

Thread query: "HttpError: Pull request reviews may only be submitted on open pull requests"

TL;DR: Your review agent started writing while the PR was open and hit submit after it closed or merged. Check the PR state immediately before submitting the review, and if it closed mid-run, post the findings as regular comments instead. The fix is a state check plus a graceful fallback, not a retry loop.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

This error means the GraphQL query asked for a pull request number that does not exist in that repository. Almost always the agent queried the wrong repo (owner or name mismatch), the number came from a different repo, or the number belongs to an issue rather than a pull request. Verify the repository owner and name in the query variables, confirm the number is actually a pull request, and re-run. It is a targeting error, not an auth error.

The query

"GraphQL: Could not resolve to a PullRequest with the number of"

Use this when

• A review bot or agent gets this exact error from GitHub's GraphQL API.
• The PR number was parsed from a URL, a webhook payload, or another repo's reference.
• The same query works for some PRs but fails for others.

Not for

• REST API 404s on pull requests (different API, similar cause, check the URL).
• 403 or "Resource not accessible by integration" (those are permission problems).
• PRs that were deleted along with their repository.

Steps

Step 1: Echo the exact query variables

echo "owner=[owner] name=[name] number=[number]"

Expected output: the three variables the GraphQL query actually sent. Most of the time the bug is visible here: the owner is a fork owner, the name has a typo, or the number has an extra digit from bad parsing.

Step 2: Check whether the number exists as a PR in that repo

gh pr view [number] --repo [owner]/[name]

Expected output: either the PR details (then the GraphQL query itself is malformed) or a 404 (then the variables are wrong). This splits the problem in half immediately.

Step 3: Check whether the number is an issue, not a PR

gh issue view [number] --repo [owner]/[name]

Expected output: if this shows an issue, you found it. Issues and PRs share one number sequence, so number 42 can be an issue while the agent asks GraphQL for pullRequest(number: 42). The fix is to query the right object type or use the right number.

Step 4: Check for the fork-vs-upstream mixup

gh pr view [number] --repo [upstream-owner]/[upstream-name]

Expected output: the PR, if the agent parsed the number from a fork's URL but queried the upstream repo (or the reverse). Cross-repo PRs live in the base repository. Query where the PR lives, not where the head branch lives.

Step 5: Fix the GraphQL query to use verified variables

query ($owner: String!, $name: String!, $number: Int!) {
  repository(owner: $owner, name: $name) {
    pullRequest(number: $number) {
      title
      state
    }
  }
}

Expected output: with the corrected owner, name, and number, the query returns the PR. Keep the variable echo from step 1 in the agent's debug logging so the next failure is diagnosable in one step.

Step 6: Add a pre-flight existence check to the review agent

gh pr view [number] --repo [owner]/[name] --json number --jq .number

Expected output: the PR number echoed back. Run this before the GraphQL batch in the review agent. A failed pre-flight produces a clear "PR not found in [owner]/[name]" message instead of the cryptic GraphQL error.

Variant phrasings

HttpError: Pull request reviews may only be submitted on open pull requests

Adjacent targeting error: the PR exists but is closed or merged. Check state before posting the review.

pr decoration failed: could not find pull request for commit

Same family: the commit is not associated with any PR in the queried repo. Check which repo and branch the commit actually belongs to.

GraphQL could not resolve to an Issue with the number of

The mirror image of this error. Same steps, querying issue(number:) instead.

Why it happens

GraphQL's repository.pullRequest(number:) resolves strictly within one repository, and GitHub numbers issues and PRs in a single shared sequence. Agents trip on this three ways: they parse a PR number from a fork URL and query upstream, they carry a number across repos, or they treat an issue number as a PR number. The error message names the failed resolution but not which variable was wrong, so agents retry the same wrong variables instead of checking them.

Edge cases

• A PR number from a deleted repository can never resolve. Verify the repo still exists before debugging the number.
• GitHub Enterprise Server slugs can differ from github.com. An owner or name that works on one host may not exist on the other.
• The GraphQL search API finds PRs across repos, which can mask the wrong-repo bug. Prefer the direct repository.pullRequest path with verified variables.
• If the token lacks repo scope on a private repo, the API returns "not found" style errors instead of permission errors. Rule out auth before concluding the number is wrong.
• Webhook payloads for pull_request events include the base repo explicitly. Prefer the payload's repo over any parsed URL.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstVCyfQdp8THfpDOY4X4TAw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstVCyfQdp8THfpDOY4X4TAw

Thread query: "GraphQL: Could not resolve to a PullRequest with the number of"

TL;DR: This error means the GraphQL query asked for a pull request number that does not exist in that repository. Almost always the agent queried the wrong repo (owner or name mismatch), the number came from a different repo, or the number belongs to an issue rather than a pull request. Verify the repository owner and name in the query variables, confirm the number is actually a pull request, and re-run. It is a targeting error, not an auth error.