Hey there!
Coderabbit DX staff here. We have a new interface we are exploring for code review called change stack. Would love to hear your feedback on it and learn of the issues you mentioned above. If you have a PR we could take a look at I can bring this to the tea,
Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
11–18 of 18 posts
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#12TBH I just use another ClaudeCode to review or ask the agent to explain its reasoning process with me. I personally believe the reviewable unit shouldn't be the final diff. Instead, review the decision trace: plan, assumptions, etc. And if you agree with the agent's decision trace, probably you will also agree how the code was implemented
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#13[flagged]
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#14It seems most people directly issue review commands to the LLM, whereas my approach is to use different skills to perform repeated cross-checks, and after each check I add corresponding tests to prevent regressions.
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#15BugBot in Cursor has been great, I rarely find myself looking at it and disagreeing, especially with medium/high impact. I also have a custom architecture reviewer that just runs Claude, that's been great for finding duplicate code, boundary breaking, etc. We still have Github Copilot reviewing because it will (very occasionally) catch something BugBot missed, but the false positive rate is wayyyy higher, to the point I've considered disabling it a few times.
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#16Hey,
the fact that Github's PR interface isn't suited anymore and that review must go from detailed style/code focus towards architecture and high-level design really resonates with a pain I've had for months.
A friend and I are just building something to solve that. In a nutshell we capture the AI sessions along the development to extract the key decisions and choices. We then use that to help navigate the diff and guide the reviewer towards what matters.
Feel free to have a look => https://www.herve.review/ we're reaching the end of the beta phase, but happy to still loop you in :)
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#17TBH I just use another ClaudeCode to review or ask the agent to explain its reasoning process with me. I personally believe the reviewable unit shouldn't be the final diff. Instead, review the decision trace: plan, assumptions, etc. And if you agree with the agent's decision trace, probably you will also agree how the code was implemented
the reviewable unit shouldn't be the final diff. Instead, review the decision trace => I can't agree more
Re: Ask HN: What tools are you using for human code review of AI-assisted code?
#18Me and my team use https://pyor.review instead of github, which I built myself, it’s a far better alternative and fixes our exact pain points