magpie

The linked article about getting LLMs to critique each others' code review[1], the magpie tool[2], and also this recent article from Cloudflare about their code review stack[3] are all quite compelling. I'm fairly AI-skeptical not on grounds of "do they work" but "are they good for the world". I feel that getting AIs to do this kind of review work is a rare case that doesn't outsource thinking and deskill workers. It doesn't trigger the same alarm bells as having the AI write the code (including having the AI fix the issues it discovers). That's setting aside environmental and other ethical concerns, which are still significant to me. I have been impressed by the recent quality of AI code reviews*, but the experience of interacting with 3 separate AI reviewers via GitHub PRs is pretty terrible. Having more local-oriented and jj/rebase-awa

Hi HN, I built Magpie because I was tired of AI code reviewers being too "nice." Most AI tools just say "LGTM" or nitpick formatting. To fix this, Magpie uses an adversarial approach: it spawns two different AI agents (e.g., a Security Expert and a Performance Critic) and forces them to debate your changes. They don't just list bugs; they attack each other's arguments until they reach a consensus. This cuts down on hallucinations and lazy approvals. Features: Adversarial Debate: Watch Claude and GPT-4o fight over your code. Local & CI: Works on local files or GitHub PRs. Model Agnostic: Supports OpenAI, Anthropic, and Gemini. The Experiment: This is also an experiment in "coding without coding." I didn't write a single line of TypeScript for this project manually. The entire repo was built using Claude Code. I'd love to hear your feedback