Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything that goes to production should have a 4-6+ eyes rule, at least one reviewer that can review the changes in isolation. If tools or LLMs can help them with it then that's fine, but it should always be at least two humans involved, one making changes, one verifying, and if something like this happens, they're both culpable. Not that they should be blamed for it per se, but the process and their way of working s…
I cringe whenever someone suggests to just have an agent review because “it knows code better”. An ai agent wouldn’t catch a lot of things a human would flag. And before someone goes you just need to prompt it better, that’s a huge amount of work for large projects and you’re still essentially begging it to do what you want.
No, AI code review doesn’t help. Claude can’t even give me correct line numbers 80% of the time, literally just makes them up, and more than half of it is false positive BS anyway.