Skip to content

πŸ›οΈ Code Review Council

AI reviews AI-generated code. Evidence required. Every blocker must prove itself.

Get Started β†’ View on GitHub

AI is writing your code β€” who is reviewing it?


⚑ How It Works

Every PR passes through a five-stage pipeline β€” deterministic checks first, LLM analysis only where it adds value:

Stage Name What Happens Cost
0 πŸ”’ Gate Zero Secrets, lint, types, missing docs β€” under 2 seconds Zero
1 βœ‚οΈ Diff Preprocessor Filters lockfiles and generated code, enforces token budgets Zero
2 πŸ“¦ ReviewPack Builds structured context: symbols, test map, policy violations Zero
3 πŸ€– Reviewer Panel SecOps, QA, Architect, Docs β€” parallel, evidence required 4Γ— LLM
4 πŸͺ‘ Council Chair Synthesises findings, requires exploit chain for blockers, renders verdict 1Γ— LLM

5-stage pipeline and two output modes


🎯 Two Outputs, One Review Engine

πŸ§‘β€πŸ’» Developer πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό Owner
Audience Engineers Product / Leadership
Focus File/line findings, evidence, fix suggestions Plain-English risk, ship/no-ship recommendation
Extra Policy references, Chair rationale Copy-paste fix prompt for AI coding agent
Review strength Full Full β€” same engine, different presentation

πŸ“Š Real Verdict

This is actual output from Council reviewing its own PR:

Overall verdict: PASS  (confidence: 0.90)

  secops     PASS   0 findings
  qa         PASS   2 findings  (2 warnings accepted)
  architect  PASS   0 findings
  docs       PASS   0 findings

Runtime: 48 seconds

β†’ See the full breakdown on the Self Review page.


⚑ Try It Locally

git clone https://github.com/vishal8shah/code-review-council
cd code-review-council
pip install .
council init
export GOOGLE_API_KEY=...
council doctor --branch main
council review --branch main

Quality gate, not a guarantee

Council is not a substitute for human engineering judgment. LLM findings are evidence-backed but not infallible β€” hallucination risk is reduced by design (structured context, mandatory file/line references, exploit chain requirements) but not eliminated. Cost and latency vary by model and diff size. Use restricted BYOK keys on repos you control.


πŸ—ΊοΈ Explore the Docs

Page What You'll Find
Overview Why this exists, the multi-LLM approach, the autonomous loop vision
Getting Started Install, init, first review, CI setup
Design Architecture decisions, ReviewPack, evidence-based Chair
Security BYOK model, key scoping, threat mitigations, merge gates
Workflows PR workflow vs BYOK workflow, artifact locations
Self Review Council reviewing its own PR β€” real output, 26 fixes, 286 collected tests
FAQ Fork PRs, model config, cost tuning, PR comments
Contributing Setup, tests, adding a new reviewer persona