Launching today
LiveReview
Free, Risk-Aware Code Review: Auto Approve Low-Risk Changes
270 followers
Free, Risk-Aware Code Review: Auto Approve Low-Risk Changes
270 followers
Most AI review tools flag issues. LiveReview promises production results: fewer incidents, fewer rollbacks, less senior reviewer load. Every PR is risk-scored. The lowest-risk 30-50% are safely auto-approved; the risky ones go straight to the engineers who should see them. The approach is inspired by Meta's highly successful internal AI review system, where production incidents fell 50x and rollbacks 3x. LLM + incident-trained ML + code-graph analysis. Free and self-hostable.
Free Options
Launch Team
LoomShow, don't just tell with Loom
Promoted
Congrats on the launch. Can we customise some particular kind of diffs so that they go to the reviewer despite having lower risk score?
@muhammedrasin Do you have a particular example in mind?
We do have customization for increasing the importance of various dimensions such as correctness, security, performance, cloud costs, etc.
You can also specify employee levels, so interns, etc always get reviewed (until their level increases).
We are also planning "keyword based" assignment -- so if particular trigger words there it'll goto reviewers.
But if you're thinking some other way of doing this -- let me know, happy to support.
@lucasjpols Thank you, Lucas, for the support!
@lucasjpols Thanks Lucas <3
Very nice, congrats on the launch!
@nathan_tarbert Thank you for the support :)
@nathan_tarbert Thanks Nathan <3
how does an incident get linked back to a PR? ours show up days after the deploy, in Sentry or in a saturated db pool, and rarely point at one commit. do you read Sentry/PagerDuty or do we tag reverts by hand?
@raphael_millet2 We have both UI and API webhooks for marking production incidents/reverts. So both are possible, depending on your exact setup (happy to work with you and configure it). We do want to develop sentry/pagerduty native connections as well (on the way).
auto-approving the low-risk PRs is the useful part. when it routes a riskier one, does the engineer see the risk score breakdown or just a flag?
@neerajnathany Detailed risk score is available; almost every piece of the final result can be inspected. This is useful for tweaking the system over time.
most review bots just spam nits on every pr and people stop reading them. risk scoring first feels like the right order. does the auto-approve play nice with branch protection or do you still need a human check to merge?
@farnabaz Hi Ahad, thanks for taking the time to leave a comment.
Presently, we merely auto approve, not auto merge. Essentially the review becomes mergeable without any further efforts. Would you like to have this kind of push into protected branch powers? Will consider adding it if you believe that's helpful
@shrsv I think that would be really helpful. ideally, a configurable one so maintainers can control. not all low-risk PRs are good to auto-merge but when it comes from a trusted contributor I can trust it.
@farnabaz Got it, makes sense. As to trust -- we do have trust levels (intern gets say level 1, a senior might be level 3, etc -- it's just a sequence). I will add this auto merge for trusted contributors as you've suggested in the next iteration. Thank you!
cool launch, congrats!! if a one-line config change hits the payments path, does LiveReview flag it from the code graph or could it get auto approved as low risk?
@igorblink thanks for engaging. For things such as auth, security and payments -- it'll catch things as high risk and flag it for humans for review.
Each organization can also define it's risk appetite as a percentile, so a regulated enterprise can have a conservative setting whereas a startup can take more aggressive risks and our tool helps each org set the risk threshold they wish to take on.
There are also individual sliders for various risk dimensions in correctness, compliance, security, performance, scaling, cloud costs, etc.
@shrsv amazing :)