.NET: Python: Clarify PR review comment resolution

[Evan Mattson (moonbox3)]

Motivation & Context

Review feedback can remain open after contributors have addressed it, leaving maintainers to close completed conversations.

Description & Review Guide

• What are the major changes? Document that PR authors must reply to every review comment and resolve completed conversations themselves.
• What is the impact of these changes? Review status and outstanding feedback will be clearer for contributors and maintainers.
• What do you want reviewers to focus on? Whether the guidance clearly distinguishes completed conversations from active discussion.

Related Issue

N/A — documentation policy clarification.

Contribution Checklist

• The code builds clean without any errors or warnings
• All unit tests pass, and I have added new tests where possible
• The PR follows the Contribution Guidelines
• This PR is linked to an issue and there is no other open PR for this issue (see Related Issue above).
• This is not a breaking change. If it is a breaking change, add the breaking change label (or add "[BREAKING]" to the title prefix, before or after any language prefix) — a workflow keeps the label and title prefix in sync automatically.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Clarifies contributor responsibility for replying to review feedback and resolving completed conversations.

Changes:

• Adds repository-wide review-resolution guidance.
• Updates the Python pull-request skill workflow.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File	Description
CONTRIBUTING.md	Documents review comment resolution policy.
python/.github/skills/pull-requests/SKILL.md	Instructs authors to resolve completed threads.

[github-actions]

MAF Automated Review — Iteration 1

Result: Findings reported
Scope: full PR (1 commit(s)): c99f9b1a28af
Model: gpt-5.6-sol

Overview

The PR clearly defines when authors should reply to and resolve review conversations, while preserving active discussions and allowing reviewers to reopen threads. The updated Python skill provides matching operational guidance and commands. However, the repository-wide policy is not propagated to the duplicated root and .NET pull-request skills, so agent behavior remains inconsistent across contribution surfaces.

Reviewed the supplied pull-request change set across correctness, security/reliability, architecture, and failure behavior.
1 verified finding remained after source verification (1 medium) across 1 file. Details are attached to the affected lines below.

Affected areas: CONTRIBUTING.md

[github-actions]

MAF Automated Review — Iteration 2

Result: No findings
Scope: 1 net-new commit(s): 9ba16d34c571
Model: gpt-5.6-sol

Overview

This incremental commit synchronizes the root and .NET pull-request skills with the previously updated Python guidance. The workflow requires authors to reply, complete necessary discussion, and leave unanswered questions or active discussions open; reviewers can reopen conversations when more work is needed. No publishable Critical, High, or Medium defect remains in the reviewed range.

Reviewed the supplied incremental change set across correctness, security/reliability, architecture, and failure behavior.
No publishable findings remained after source verification for this scope.