I have been using Codex as a code review step and it has been magnificent, truly. I don’t like how it writes code, but as a second line of defence I’m getting better code reviews out of it than I’ve ever had from a human.
Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
11–20 of 69 posts
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#12Hum? I just tell claude to review pr #123 and it uses 'gh' to do everything, including responding to human comments! Feedback from coleagues has been awesome.
We are sooo gonna get replaced soon...
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#13TIL: you could add a ".diff" to a PR URL. Thanks! As for PR reviews, assuming you've got linting and static analysis out the way, you'd need to enter a sufficiently reasonable prompt to truly catch problems or surface reviews that match your standard and not generic AI comments. My company uses some automatic AI PR review bots, and they annoy me more than they help. Lots of useless comments
`gh pr diff num` is an alternative if you have the repo checked out. One can then pipe the output to one's favorite llm CLI and create a shell alias with a default review prompt.
> My company uses some automatic AI PR review bots, and they annoy me more than they help. Lots of useless comments
One way to make them more useful is to ask to list the topN problems found in the change set.
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#14With not much more effort you can get a much better review by additionally concatenating the touched files and sending them as context along with the diff. It was the work of about five minutes to make the scaffolding of a very basic bot that does this, and then somewhat more time iterating on the prompt. By the way, I find it's seriously worth sucking up the extra ~four minutes of delay and going up to GPT-5 high ra…
I've been using gemini-3-flash the last few days and it is quite good, I'm not sure you need the biggest models anymore. I have only switched to pro once or twice the last few days Here are the commits, the tasks were not trivial https://github.com/hofstadter-io/hof/commits/_next/ Social posts and pretty pictures as I work on my custom copilot replacement https://bsky.app/profile/verdverm.com
Yes, it's my new daily driver for light coding and the rest. Also great at object recognition and image gen
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#15TIL: you could add a ".diff" to a PR URL. Thanks! As for PR reviews, assuming you've got linting and static analysis out the way, you'd need to enter a sufficiently reasonable prompt to truly catch problems or surface reviews that match your standard and not generic AI comments. My company uses some automatic AI PR review bots, and they annoy me more than they help. Lots of useless comments
I would just put a PR_REVIEW.md file in the repo an have a CI agent run it on the diff/repo and decide pass or reject. In this file there are rules the code must be evaluated against. It could be project level policy, you just put your constraints you cannot check by code testing. Of course any constraint that can be a code test, better be a code test.
My experience is you can trust any code that is well tested, human or AI generated. And you cannot trust any code that is not well tested (what I call "vibe tested"). But some constraints need to be in natural language, and for that you need a LLM to review the PRs. This combination of code tests and LLM review should be able to ensure reliable AI coding. If it does not, iterate on your PR rules and on tests.
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#16I recently started using LLMs to review my code before asking for a more formal review from colleagues. It's actually been surprisingly useful - why waste my colleagues time with small obvious things? But it's also gone much further than that sometimes with deeper reviews points. Even when I don't agree with them it's great having that little bit more food for thought - if anything it helps seed the review
Are you using a particularly well crafted prompt or just something off the cuff?
Personally, this is what I use in claude code:
"Diff to master and review the changes. Branch designed to address . Write output to d:\claudeOut in typst (.typ) format."
It'll do the diffs and search both branch and master versions of files.
I prefer reading PDFs than markdown, but it'll default to markdown unprompted if you prefer.
I have almost all my workspaces configured with /add-dir to add d:/claudeOut and d:/claudeIn as general scratch folders for temporary in/out file permissions so it can read/write outside the context of the workspace for things like this.
You might get better results using a better crafted prompt (or code review skill?). In general I find claude code reviews are:
- Overly fussy about null checking everything
- Completely miss on whether the PR has properly distilled the problem down to its essence
- Are good at catching spelling mistakes
- Like to pretend they know if something is well architectured, but doesn't
It will absolutely assume too much from naming, so it's kind of a good spot if it's making wrong kind of assumptions about how parts work, to think how to name things more clearly.
e.g. If you write a class called "AddingFactory", it'll go around assuming that's what it does, even if the core of it returns (a, b) -> a*b.
You have to then work hard to get it to properly examine the file and convince itself that it is actually a multiplier.
Obviously real-world examples are more subtle than that, but if you're finding yourself arguing with it, it's worth sometimes considering whether you should rename things.
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#17How to do agentic workflow like 2 years ago.
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#18https://cursor.com/bugbot
I didn't see this mentioned, but we've been running bugbot for a while now and it's very good. It catches so many subtle bugs.
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#19TIL: you could add a ".diff" to a PR URL. Thanks! As for PR reviews, assuming you've got linting and static analysis out the way, you'd need to enter a sufficiently reasonable prompt to truly catch problems or surface reviews that match your standard and not generic AI comments. My company uses some automatic AI PR review bots, and they annoy me more than they help. Lots of useless comments
> TIL: you could add a ".diff" to a PR URL. Thanks!
You can also append ".patch" and get a more useful output
Re: Get an AI code review in 10 seconds
#20TIL: you could add a ".diff" to a PR URL. Thanks! As for PR reviews, assuming you've got linting and static analysis out the way, you'd need to enter a sufficiently reasonable prompt to truly catch problems or surface reviews that match your standard and not generic AI comments. My company uses some automatic AI PR review bots, and they annoy me more than they help. Lots of useless comments
I would just put a PR_REVIEW.md file in the repo an have a CI agent run it on the diff/repo and decide pass or reject. In this file there are rules the code must be evaluated against. It could be project level policy, you just put your constraints you cannot check by code testing. Of course any constraint that can be a code test, better be a code test. My experience is you can trust any code that is well tested, huma…
[deleted]