Show HN: I built a tool to review my teammates' pull requests faster | Hacker News Reader

Show HN: I built a tool to review my teammates' pull requests faster

gitreviewed.com

1 pointedai-6 comments

Hi HN,

I’m Valentin, a developer who’s found code reviews to be a slow process, especially after context switching or juggling different projects and languages. Even reviewing my own code can be tough when I’ve lost the thread or just need a fresh perspective.

Over the past few weekends, I built GitReviewed to make PR reviews faster, smarter, and genuinely useful for real teams.

What it does:

- Reviews any GitHub or GitLab pull/merge request with AI-powered comments, spotting security issues, code patterns, typos, and more

- Posts comments as you (not a bot), so feedback fits naturally into your workflow

- Lets you tweak the feedback’s tone and detail level to match your team’s style

- Neat trick: Just swap github.com or gitlab.com for gitreviewed.com in any PR/MR URL to jump straight to an instant review

This is my first SaaS project, so I’d really appreciate any feedback, suggestions, or advice from anyone who’s been down this road.

I’ll be around in the comments! Thanks for checking it out!

Open articleView on HN

Code reviews take a lot of time and delay intergration. As an alternative, you could do away with them to just do all commits on a single branch. That is the ultimate form of Continuous Intergration. As a developer you can do work on your own 'private' branch before merging to the main branch and having a tool to review your own code changes would be usefull.

Appreciate the comment! You’re right, merging straight to main works for some teams. But in companies I’ve worked at, peer review is required and the process can definitely slow things down (whether it’s policy or just the team culture).

That’s actually one of the idea behind this tool: helping you review your own code before merging. In fact, I used it to review my own code while building this project

What's the benefit of using this vs GitHub's own PR copilot? Also, I think you'll struggle with the pricing structure - too low for individual devs to bother using. And no larger companies will be open to let you access their private repos, so you have to cater to individuals at first (or open source).

Great questions, thanks for the thoughtful feedback!

On Copilot PR reviews: GitReviewed works for both GitHub and GitLab (with plans to add Bitbucket and Azure DevOps), and lets you fully customize the review tone and style. Comments are posted as you, not a bot, so reviews feel natural and human. The goal is to make reviews faster and more helpful for real workflows. I believe peer reviews will still be around for a time.

Pricing: Finding the right price point is definitely a challenge for me. I wanted to keep it accessible for individuals and small teams, but I’m open to adjusting the structure as I get more feedback.

On company trust: Absolutely, larger companies have mentioned being cautious with new SaaS tools like mine. For now, I’m focusing on individual devs and keeping things as transparent as possible regarding permissions and data.

GitReviewed works with your own PAT (for GitHub), GitHub OAuth or GitLab OAuth, so it only accesses what you can see - no extra permissions required. You can review PRs as if you were doing it yourself on their UI, without granting full repo access. Only GitHub OAuth (not PAT) requests broader permissions, while I give the choice to the user to keep this way or PAT way.

Thanks again, this kind of feedback is super helpful as I keep improving things!

This is super useful—well done! Code reviews can easily become a bottleneck, especially when juggling multiple projects or switching contexts. I really like your approach of using AI to generate human-like comments—it feels like a natural part of the workflow rather than an interruption.

Thank you, I really appreciate the kind words!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com