I dislike the idea of coupling my workflow to saas platforms like github or code rabbit. The fact that you still have to create local tools is a selling point for just doing it all “locally”.
Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
11–20 of 38 posts
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#12Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
No,
The linked page explains how this fits into a development workflow
eg.
> A reviewer wrote “consider using X”… is that blocking or just a thought?
> AMBIGUOUS - Needs human judgment (suggestions, questions)
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#13Very interesting! This has a gem in the documentation: Using the tool itself as a CI check. I hadn't considered unresolved comments by say a person, or CodeRabbit or similar tool being a CI status failure. That's an excellent idea for AI driven PR's.
On a personal note; I hate LLM output to advertise a project. If you have something to share have the decency to type it out yourself or at least redact the nonsense from it.
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#14Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
At a scale, I don't see a net negative of AI merging "shit by itself" if the developer (or the agent) is ensuring sufficient e2e, integration and unit test coverage prior to every merge, if in return I get my team to crank out features at a 10x speed.
The reality is that probably 99.9999% of code bases on this earth (but this might drop soon, who knows) pre-date LLMs and organizing them in a way that coding agents can produce consistent results from sprint to sprint, will need a big plumbing work from all dev teams. And that will include refactoring, documentation improvements, building consensus on architectures and of course reshaping the testing landscape. So SWE's will have a lot of dirty work to do before we reach the aforementioned "scale".
However, a lot of platforms are being built from ground-up today in a post-CC (claude code) era . And they should be ready to hit that scale today.
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did! The issue however, is having a clear, deterministic method of defining when the code review was 'done'. So the hooks can fire off subagents, but they are non-deterministic and often miss vital code review comments - especially ones that are marked in an inline comment, or are marked as 'Out of PR Scope' or 'Out of range of the file' - which are often the MOST important comments to address! So gtg builds all of…
I thought hooks are always fired if you use it as a PreToolUse event. Wouldn’t that work for the GitHub action tools from the GitHub mcp?
Sure, but that mcp still missed actionable comments that are marked as Out of Scope or Outside the PR - and this doesn't require having the context window loss of having another mcp instantiated, either. Anyway, give gtg a competitive look against the mcp - you should be able to see the difference
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#16Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
At a scale, I don't see a net negative of AI merging "shit by itself" if the developer (or the agent) is ensuring sufficient e2e, integration and unit test coverage prior to every merge, if in return I get my team to crank out features at a 10x speed. The reality is that probably 99.9999% of code bases on this earth (but this might drop soon, who knows) pre-date LLMs and organizing them in a way that coding agents ca…
Yup! Software engineers aren't going to be out of work anytime soon, but I'm acting more like a CTO or VPE with a team of agents now, rather than just a single dev with a smart intern.
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#17Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
Someone’s gonna think about wiring all this up to Linear or Jira, and there’ll be a whole new set of vulnerabilities created from malicious bug reports.
That's why I intentionally don't have this hooked into an ingest flow - you still get control over what issues/stories you want the agent swarm to work on... Just now, I can know that the code that was written has been reviewed and all comments have been fully addressed!
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#18Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
No, The linked page explains how this fits into a development workflow eg. > A reviewer wrote “consider using X”… is that blocking or just a thought? > AMBIGUOUS - Needs human judgment (suggestions, questions)
Right! It doesn't assume that all comments are actionable, or need to be worked on. However, if you allow anyone to comment on your PRs, it could be a malicious vector. So don't let anyone review PRs on projects that you care about!!!
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#19Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
I don’t think “ready to merge” necessarily means the agent actually merges. Just that it’s gone as far as it can automatically. It’s up to you whether to review at that point or merge, depending on the project and the stakes. If there are CI failures or obvious issues that another AI can identify, why not have the agent keep going until those are resolved? This tool just makes that process more token efficient. Seems…
That's EXACTLY right. Ready to merge is an important gate, but it is very stupid to just merge everything without further checks/testing by a human!
Re: Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go
#20Sorry, so the tool is now even circumventing human review? Is that the goal? So the agent can now merge shit by itself? Just the let damn thing push nto prod by itself at this point.
No, it just prepares the PR - it doesn't automatically merge. That would be very dangerous, imho!