everyone knows coding agents have caused PR volume to explode. that’s been obvious for a while. what feels more interesting now is that most teams still send almost every PR through the exact same review process. tiny generated change? human approval. well-tested low risk refactor? human approval. large change touching important systems? also human approval. when PR volume keeps climbing, reviewer attention becomes the thing you actually have to allocate. tools like bugBot have been useful for taking the first pass. macroscope’s approvability feature is interesting for a slightly different reason: it can approve PRs that meet a team’s policy, so some changes never need to sit in the human review queue in the first place. feels like the next problem isn’t “how do we review more PRs?” it’s “which PRs actually deserve human attention?” how are teams deciding that today? are you still requiring a human approval on every PR? submitted by /u/Gullible_Cobbler_195
Originally posted by u/Gullible_Cobbler_195 on r/ClaudeCode
You must log in or # to comment.