logoalt Hacker News

personjerryyesterday at 6:24 PM1 replyview on HN

I don't really understand how this differentiates against the competition.

> Independence

Any "agent" running against code review instead of code generation is "independent"?

> Autonomy

Most other code review tools can also be automated and integrated.

> Loops

You can also ping other code review tools for more reviews...

I feel like this article actually works against you by presenting the problem and inadequately solving them.


Replies

dakshguptayesterday at 6:39 PM

> Independence

It is, but when a model/harness/tools/system prompts are the same/similar in the generator and reviewer fail in similar ways. Question: Would you trust a Cursor review of Claude-written code more, less, or the same as a Cursor review of Cursor-written code?

> Autonomy

Plenty of tools have invested heavily in AI-assisted review - creating great UIs to help human reviewers understand and check diffs. Our view is that code validation will be completely autonomous in the medium term, and so our system is designed to make all human intervention optional. This is possibly a unpopular opinion, and we respect the camp that might say people will always review AI-generated code. It's just not the future we want for this profession, nor the one we predict.

> Loops

You can invest in UX and tooling that makes this easier or harder. Our first step towards making this easier is a native Claude Code plugin in the `/plugins` command that let's Claude code do a plan, write, commit, get review comments, plan, write loop.

show 3 replies