Code Review
A pull request opens at 2am and sits. Before anyone on your team gets to it, this agent reads the diff against your team's written conventions and the things you've been burned by before — a secret pasted into a config file, money stored as a float, a migration with no rollback, a query missing the tenant filter — and leaves inline comments on the lines it's worried about. It never approves and it never merges. Your engineers still decide.
Yours outright — no required subscription.
Every agent is built for your business — your systems, your approval chain, your way of working. We scope it on the call.
If this sounds too technical, don't worry. We take care of everything for you.
- Private VPS deployment. This agent runs on a server that belongs to you, not a shared cloud tenant. Your code is read from a box you own.
- A technician agent alongside it. Every hire ships as a pair: the Code Review Agent reading diffs, and a VPS-technician agent on the same box keeping it patched, backed up, and monitored. You're not hiring one thing, you're hiring a small team of two.
- Your conventions, written down. The rules it enforces live in a plain-text file in your repository — the date library you standardised on, the auth helper every customer-facing route goes through, the patterns that have cost you a weekend before. We draft it from your existing code and your past reviews; you approve it before anything goes live.
- Repository and channel connection. Wired into where your pull requests already open and where your team already talks about them, so nobody has to forward it anything.
- Security hardening. Private VPN, firewall, and encryption configured on your server before it is given read access to a single repository.
- A live walkthrough of both agents. We open a real pull request together and show you what it comments on, what it deliberately stays quiet about, and how to edit a rule the day it gets one wrong.
- 14 days of priority support after launch, to tune the rules against the pull requests your team actually opens.
Not sure it fits? Check fit in 90 seconds in the free assessment chat.
Who this is for
- You're the only person at a 10–30 person shop who really reviews anything, and you're billable on client calls until four. Pull requests sit for two days, then get approved five at a time on Friday afternoon.
- You have two or three developers in-house plus contractors offshore. Their 900-line diff lands at 2am, and the person who merges it is the person who hired them, not someone who can read the language it's written in.
- You keep leaving the same three comments — secret in the diff, money as a float, migration with no rollback — and you've stopped believing anyone will remember next time.
- You have conventions — they're just in your head and a contributing guide nobody has touched since 2024. New contractors break them on their first pull request, and you only find out at review.
How it earns trust
The failure mode of AI in code review isn't that it's sometimes wrong — every reviewer is. It's that you can't tell which comments were wrong, so the team learns to scroll past all of them, right ones included. This agent makes the opposite bet: every comment carries the rule that produced it, and you can edit it.
Every comment names its rule
Nothing it says is anonymous judgment. Each comment cites the rule it came from, and those rules sit in a plain-text file in your repository that you approved at setup. When it's wrong you can point at the exact line that made it wrong, change it, and see the change on the next pull request.
A run log that records the silences
On your server, a log keeps every pull request it opened, which files it read, and what it commented on — plus the part most tools hide: what it looked at and said nothing about. So "it didn't catch that" becomes answerable. You can see whether it read the file and missed, or was never pointed at it.
A scoreboard already sitting in your history
Everything it says is an ordinary review comment under its own account, anchored to a line and a commit — visible, resolvable, dismissible, permanent. Over any month you can count comments left against comments resolved and comments dismissed. A high dismissal rate is the agent failing in public, in a number you can read without asking anyone.
How much of the first pass it takes off you depends on how uniform your codebase and conventions are, and we'll size that with you on the call rather than promise a number up front.
Pairs well with
These share a workflow with this role. Tick any to add them to your setup.
Everything waits on me to look at it. What actually changes?
The first pass stops waiting on you. Within minutes of a pull request opening, the pattern-level check is done and commented inline, so when you get to it at four you're reading a diff someone already went over. It does not clear the PR — you still decide. Typically live in about seven days from kickoff.
Can it block a merge, or merge something itself?
No. It has no branch-protection role, no required-reviewer status, and no ability to approve or merge. It also never pushes code: it doesn't commit to the branch, doesn't open fix-up pull requests, and doesn't quietly correct what it flagged. Everything it produces is a comment your engineers dismiss with one click, and the approving name on every PR stays a person on your team.
I don't want another bot yelling in my pull requests.
Fair. It will flag correct code sometimes, and the real cost is a team that learns to scroll past it. That's why the rules are yours: every comment names the rule behind it, you edit that line, and the next PR reflects it. It never rewrites its own rules — it can suggest one, a human adds it.
Half of what we ship now was written by an AI and I'm the only one reading it. Does it keep up?
On normal-sized diffs, yes — it doesn't care who typed them. But machine-generated changes defeat it the same way they defeat a human: on lockfiles, generated migrations, vendored code, or a 2,000-line refactor it either says nothing useful or produces noise. It reads the change, not the intent behind it.
Does it get access to our servers or our production data?
No. It reads your repository and the diff. It holds no deploy keys, runs no migrations, has no connection to a live database, and never sees production data. It runs on a server you own — you own the server, the code, and the keys, and we keep the recipe we used to cook it.
What's covered under the $1,997 setup, and what isn't?
One company, one code host, one review process. Setup is scoped on a free 15-minute call, and it's a flat one-time fee. Multiple organisations with genuinely different conventions per repo is a scoped conversation, not a price adjustment. And to be plain: catching common insecure patterns is not a security audit, not a pentest, and not an answer to a client's security questionnaire.
Hiring more than one? A department on tap — the subscription puts a build team behind every request, agent after agent.