HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
spencermarx
open-code-review
TypeScript2026–2026
spencermarx / open-code-review

open-code-review

AI-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a customizable team of Engineers performing code review with built-in discourse.

Developer ToolsAI & Machine Learning
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
2Distinct people
7Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
387GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

AI-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a customizable team of Engineers performing code review with built-in discourse.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 4:01:40 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by week7 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2026-01-26 23:54:27 UTC to 2026-06-16 10:04:22 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.

01232026-01-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-02-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 2 submissions, 1 commentsJan 262026-02-02 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-02-09 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-02-09 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-02-16 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-02-16 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-02-23 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-02-23 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-03-02 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-09 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2026-03-09 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-16 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-03-16 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-23 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2026-03-23 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-30 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-03-30 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsApr 62026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsJun 15

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Jan 262026-01-26 00:00:00 UTC2026-02-02 00:00:00 UTC321
Feb 22026-02-02 00:00:00 UTC2026-02-09 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 92026-02-09 00:00:00 UTC2026-02-16 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 162026-02-16 00:00:00 UTC2026-02-23 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 232026-02-23 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-02 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 22026-03-02 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-09 00:00:00 UTC110
Mar 92026-03-09 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-16 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 162026-03-16 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-23 00:00:00 UTC202
Mar 232026-03-23 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-30 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 302026-03-30 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 62026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 132026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 202026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 272026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC000
May 42026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC000
May 112026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC000
May 182026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC000
May 252026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 12026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 82026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 152026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-22 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

3 sources
mrxdev·Jan 26, 2026
Been working with spec-driven development since it first emerged (OpenSpec fan), and kept running into the same gap: specs get written, AI writes the code, but validating the implementation against the spec is still a manual slog. So I put together a tool that runs multi-agent code reviews inside agentic AI environments (Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, etc). The idea is simple – instead of one reviewer, you get a few different perspectives, modeled after common engineering teams: someone thinking architecturally, someone focused on code quality, another with security expertise, a QA engineer paying close attention to testing. They review changes independently, then discuss before synthesizing feedback. You can also configure custom reviewers and adjust redundancy if you want multiple sub-agents for a given role. I originally built it to co
Read the rest
mplement SDD tools like OpenSpec, but it drops into any codebase within an agentic environment (agentic IDE or agentic terminal). My team has been running it against some larger codebases (~500k lines) and it's been genuinely useful – not as a replacement for human review, but as a way to catch things earlier. No doubt it has already saved us quite a bit of time. ```bash npx @open-code-review/cli init /ocr-review ``` Works as a pre-push sanity check or wired into CI. Though warning: your token expenditure WILL increase, especially if you ramp up the number of reviewer types or their redundancy configs. That said, curious what others think – is this useful? What's missing? Happy to hear feedback or ideas. https://github.com/spencermarx/open-code-review
In Open Code Review – Multi-agent code review (Local First but CI-ready)

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.