Most code review catches bugs. I shipped one that argues with the design.

<ul> <li>GitHub repository: <a href="https://github.com/gezilinll/agent-grove" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://github.com/gezilinll/agent-grove</a> </li> <li>Online

<p>Every time I asked Claude to review my branch, I got one of two answers: a cheerful <strong>"Looks good! 👍"</strong> or a vague list where I couldn't tell a real bug from a

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><pre><code>Built a system where Claude Code writes the code and Codex CLI reviews it independently — the reviewer never sees the builder's

<h2> Your Code Reviews Are a Bottleneck </h2> <p>Every engineering team has the same problem: PRs sit in review queues for hours (or days). Senior engineers spend 30% of their

<p>I read the phrase "spec-driven development" and immediately decided it was for people without taste. Six months later, Claude Code generated a discount system that applied

<p><em>Originally published at <a href="https://www.tddbuddy.com/blog/reviewing-ai-with-ai-is-not-review/" rel="noopener noreferrer">tddbuddy.com</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Related

<h1> My Exit Rule Said '2 Periods' — My Code Was Counting Something Else Entirely </h1> <p>My funding-rate bot has an exit rule that reads like plain English:<br /> </p> <div

<p>Your agent passed all the tests. It's been running in production for three weeks. And it has been quietly wrong the entire time.</p> <p>This is not a hypothetical. Galileo's