One signal

Code review has two jobs, argues software developer Hayden Bleasel: spotting objective bugs and judging subjective questions such as scope, direction and taste. Bleasel says AI agents are getting better at the first, shifting more of the second back to people.

His proposed next step is to write down recurring taste rules as guidelines or lint checks, so agents can handle more routine decisions too. The human role, in this account, is still to own the big calls and take responsibility for them. That’s a useful distinction for teams adopting AI reviewers: fewer bug-hunting chores do not necessarily mean less human oversight. They may simply change what people need to review.

Discuss: If an AI reviewer can apply a team’s written style rules, should humans still review every change, or focus on scope and accountability?

Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.