PR Review Engine

Open a pull request, and this bot reviews it automatically — checking for security risks, performance issues, and code-quality problems — then posts the results as a single comment on the PR itself. Three specialists run in parallel, and later pushes edit that same comment in place rather than piling up new ones.

Try it first

Open the live demo → — the engine reviewing a pull request on mock data, or start from the setup wizard → to see how a deployment gets provisioned. Free hosting, so the first load takes about a minute.

Needs: Python 3.12, uv, and a free Supabase Postgres project — budget about 30 minutes for a first working review.

Pull request opened or updated

You push code or open a PR — that's the only step you take.

→

Webhook received

GitHub calls the bot automatically the moment your PR changes.

↓

Queued for review

The request is saved in line so nothing gets missed, even under heavy traffic.

↓

Security

Looks for risky code, like exposed secrets or unsafe input handling.

Performance

Flags code that could run slowly or waste resources.

Code Quality

Suggests cleaner, easier-to-maintain code.

↓

Findings combined

All three reports are merged into one clear summary.

↓

Posted as a PR comment

The summary appears directly on your pull request — no dashboard required.

What a review looks like

A real posted comment, condensed to one finding per specialist:

## 🤖 Automated Code Review — PR #42
_3 specialists · llama-3.3-70b-versatile (groq) · 4.2s · ~$0.0021_

### 🔒 Security — 1 finding
| Severity | Line | Issue | Suggested fix |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 🔴 critical | `app/auth.py:88` | API key is logged in plaintext when the request fails | Log only the key's length/hash, never the raw value |

### ⚡ Performance — 1 finding
| Impact | Line | Issue | Suggestion |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 🟡 medium | `app/api/users.py:145` | N+1 | Batch these lookups into a single query |

### 🧹 Code Quality — 1 finding
| Category | Line | Issue | Refactoring suggestion |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| duplication | `app/utils/format.py:22` | Date-formatting logic is duplicated across three modules | Extract a shared helper |

---
<sub>Runtime 4.2s · 1,842 tok in / 612 tok out · est. $0.0021 · provider: groq</sub>

If a specialist's own check fails outright, its section says so plainly instead of vanishing — partial failure is always visible, never silent.

The one command to remember

uv run python -m scripts.doctor

Run it any time, from a fresh clone or mid-setup. It answers three questions: where am I, what's missing, and what's next — without ever mutating anything.

Get started →