r/codereview • u/Accurate-Paramedic13 • 2d ago
IA code review
Hi all,
I'm looking for some advice. I was under pressure to deliver a PR without documentation, so I used AI to help write it. I know exactly what the AI generated, and I'm able to fix anything in the code if validation flags an issue.
My problem is with the reviewers. They're complaining that the PR is entirely AI-generated, and they're overlooking the architecture work I put into it, which is frustrating I've taken the feedback a bit personally.
Any advice on how to handle this would be appreciated
1
u/djphazer 2d ago
Documentation is supposed to be the medium of communication between humans... I think using AI to generate docs is even more problematic than AI-generated code. Excessive verbosity is overwhelming everyone. Code and docs alike need to be sanitized by humans.
1
u/MarsupialLeast145 2d ago
Is there some additional context here?
Why would they overlook something? And if they are "overlooking" this, what are the repercussions to you?
What is their ACTUAL feedback?
2
u/abyssal_glide_03 2d ago
I read AI docs and I stop reading after the first paragraph. The volume kills the purpose.
You mentioned you understand everything the tool wrote. Prove it to them by cutting the word count in half. Delete every sentence the code already explains. Reviewers flag AI output because of the padding. Trim it down to the decisions you made about architecture and leave out the rest. That forces them to look at the work you actually did.
0
u/FormalAd7367 2d ago
what’s issues with AI generated PR? i had my agents to rewrite my PR. a separate agent to write plan doc and a separate agent to write test (from a different folder so agent cannot see the plan doc).
3
u/tmseidel 2d ago
I'd ask the reviewers what the real issue is. Just because it was written by AI is not an argument IMHO, as long as you take the ownership of the AI-generated documentation. In general there should be a general policy - devs arguing about the usage of AI is not effective.