Our goal is to run a nightly process where production errors from the last 24 hours are analyzed by Claude, and proposed fixes are created in our GitHub repository as Draft Pull Requests.
The expected flow is: Collect and group production errors daily Generate a structured bug report for each unique issue Claude analyzes the repository, identifies root cause, and implements a minimal fix Add or update relevant tests Open a Draft PR including root cause analysis, fix explanation, and test results The PR must remain in Draft state with no automatic merge.
Developers will review the proposed changes each morning. We also require strict permission controls, no exposure of sensitive secrets, and proper CI validation before review.
Please guide us on the recommended architecture, security best practices, and any workflow configuration to help us implement this.
We can share our tech stack and sample sanitized error logs if needed. currently we have made implmenation , that cloud watch we have the erros is wachted by cloud watch , then the erros comes to RDS and then all the erros is send to the developer so whether the code is written by that developer or not , so we need implmnet that also that error that is come that error should go to tht email only those who have weiten the code or some primary key so that we can get to know that its written by them
Automating bug reports and fixes with Claude and GitHub
+5- Zapier Solution Partner
Hey
-
Nightly grouping
-
Keep CloudWatch as the source.
-
Nightly job pulls the last 24 hours, groups errors by a fingerprint (service + exception type + top stack frames).
-
For each group, generate a small bug report: what happened, how often, sample stack trace, first seen, last seen, links to logs.
-
Route each issue to the right owner
You need a reliable way to map an error to “who owns this code.” Most teams do one of these:
-
CODEOWNERS file in GitHub. If your stack trace includes file paths, you can map the file to the CODEOWNERS rules and email that team or person.
-
Service ownership map. If each error includes a service name, route by service owner (simple and usually more accurate than “last committer”).
-
Git blame as a fallback. If you can pinpoint a file and line, you can look up recent committers, but this gets noisy and isn’t always fair.
If you want “only the person who wrote it,” that’s usually the least stable option. Ownership by service or CODEOWNERS is what holds up over time.
-
Claude analysis and fix generation
-
Don’t give Claude broad access to prod data. Give it the bug report plus the minimum repo context it needs.
-
Run the code change in a locked down environment:
-
Read-only access to the repo for analysis
-
A separate GitHub token that can only create branches and draft PRs
-
No access to secrets
-
-
Have Claude output a proposed patch and test changes, not free-form instructions.
-
Draft PR creation and CI
-
Use GitHub API to create a PR in Draft state.
-
Protect your main branch:
-
Require CI checks to pass
-
Require reviews
-
Do not allow auto-merge from this bot
-
-
The PR description should include: short root cause, what changed, what tests were added, and CI status.
-
Security basics that matter here
-
Sanitize logs before they leave AWS. Strip tokens, emails, customer data, request bodies.
-
Use least-privilege tokens everywhere:
-
AWS role only for reading needed logs
-
GitHub App or fine-grained token scoped to one repo and PR creation only
-
-
Keep secrets out of Zapier steps entirely if you can. If you do use Zapier, keep it as orchestration, not as the place where raw logs and credentials live.
About your current setup (RDS + emailing every dev)
The missing piece is ownership. If you can enrich each error with either service name or file path from the stack trace, you can route it cleanly. Start there before trying to get “who wrote it.”
Dr. Tanvi Sachar
Monday Certified Partner, Monday Wizard
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.