Three agents have produced draft pull requests for the same repository. Two PRs update src/auth/session.ts, and one PR updates the login test suite based on assumptions from only one of those implementations. The maintainer wants to resolve the conflict without losing useful work. Which four actions should you perform in order? 1. Compare changed files and identify shared ownership conflicts 2. Mark all draft pull requests ready for review 3. Choose or create one canonical implementation path 4. Rebase or update dependent PRs against the chosen path 5. Merge the PR with the highest test coverage first 6. Re-run checks and review outputs against the original issues

The correct sequence prioritizes conflict resolution and integration. First, comparing changed files (1) is crucial to understand the extent of the conflict in src/auth/session.ts and identify the dependency of the test suite. Next, choosing or creating one canonical implementation path (3) provides a single, agreed-upon direction for the session.ts changes, which is essential before proceeding. Then, rebasing or updating dependent PRs (4) ensures all related work aligns with the chosen path, resolving the test suite's dependency issue. Finally, re-running checks and reviewing outputs (6) validates the integrated changes. Option 2 is incorrect because marking all PRs ready for review (2) before resolving conflicts would lead to more confusion. Merging based on test coverage (5) is not the primary concern when there are direct code conflicts and dependencies. Option 3 and 4 are incorrect as they do not follow a logical flow for conflict resolution and integration.