"I pay Claude, to use Claude, to write instructions for Claude, to review code from Claude" Have we all just given up?
You forgot “to use Claude to write a HN post to promote..”
Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
11–20 of 71 posts
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#12The best code review improvement I have done in my workflow with Claude is using tuicr ( https://tuicr.dev ). It runs locally, YOU review all the code locally, and feedback that to Claude. Agents reviewing AI code always felt dirty to me, especially when working on production (non-disposable) code.
The video actually convinced me that this might be an interesting tool. I'm going to try it myself for a small one-shot project and see how well it performs.
TUI-based reviews on it's own are already interesting. I had never considered it, I guess.
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#13"I pay Claude, to use Claude, to write instructions for Claude, to review code from Claude" Have we all just given up?
s/Claude/Intern/g
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#14the irony of multi-agent code review is that the people who would use it are already the ones who care about code quality. the real problem is everyone else just hitting accept on whatever claude spits out without even reading the diff. tooling for review keeps getting better while the average review effort keeps going down.
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#15Is there a good way of adding in your own rules to the review? I’m always in the market for better review tools but I also need to check against internal coding stands and expectations,
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#16We seem to be fighting complexity with complexity. Does it really help?
This has been the gradual progression of the software world for the past half century, so it’s apt to use LLMs to fight LLMs and call it progress.
I wish I was kidding…
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#17The best code review improvement I have done in my workflow with Claude is using tuicr ( https://tuicr.dev ). It runs locally, YOU review all the code locally, and feedback that to Claude. Agents reviewing AI code always felt dirty to me, especially when working on production (non-disposable) code.
that's a good addition to fresh editor (also tui) and both rust
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#18Why not just use an eval harness to prove this catches more real bugs? Benchmarks on actual bug classes would be far more convincing than comparing against /review.
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#19[dead]
Re: Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
#20Why not just use an eval harness to prove this catches more real bugs? Benchmarks on actual bug classes would be far more convincing than comparing against /review.
That’s probably more work than the entire repo itself. Would need to be something like SWE-bench with and without “adamsreview”.
You’re right though, but evals are actually fairly tricky to write and maintain.