Hi all, I believe most of us are now using AI to author and review PRs. While it is fast and efficient, I have a few concerns regarding how we use it for code reviews.
Recently, I have noticed increasingly lengthy AI-generated comments. Dissecting these comments to find the root issue takes significant time. Why not hand over the job to AI? Yes, I do this all the time but I still have to review its proposed action plan. If that plan doesn't make sense, I must trace back to the original review. Furthermore, conflicting comments from different AI reviewers can cause an inefficient loop, as each tool operates on different context. I'm not sure human reviewers ever review these AI comments before posting them. I'm also unsure this process remains cost-effective given the token expenses. When I use AI to review a PR, I prefer to read its findings (you feel the pain immediately), rephrase the valid points in my own words, and post them manually. Would this approach be a better way for us to utilize AI reviewers? I would appreciate your thoughts. *Disclosure: This email was polished by AI.* Best regards, Manu
