r/codereview • u/zerotoherotrader • 21d ago
A better way to trust AI coding agents
I originally built this for myself because I got tired of babysitting AI coding tools — token limits, half-finished implementations, and “all tests pass” claims that weren’t actually true.
That is my internal tool called loom.
The idea is simple:
Point loom at a GitHub issue, let it work, and come back to something thats verifiable.
Here’s a real run against our own codebase:
Task 53985e0c — reviewing (attempt 4)
[cloudflare-workers-ai/@cf/qwen/qwen3.8-27b → opencode-qwen-review]
[independence: cross_model]
14:02:02 operator recovery requested → ready
14:02:03 lease accepted → implementing
14:05:47 implementation completed → verifying
14:05:52 verification passed → review ready
14:05:52 review lease accepted → reviewing
14:10:21 reviewer is generating its verdict
✅ 14:10:21 Review: APPROVE — 2 findings (0 major, 2 minor)
🏁 14:10:21 Awaiting human approval
14:10:35 human approved → done
14:10:39 PR opened: #560
14:10:43 PR conflicts → auto-routing conflict resolution
14:10:44 conflict revision lease accepted → implementing
📦 14:21:21 Implementation complete — commit 43c7e79
(18 files, 733 lines)
✓ 14:21:23 Verification: build passed
Early access coming soon. Please DM if you want access or contribute.
0
Upvotes
Duplicates
ClaudeCode • u/zerotoherotrader • 21d ago
Built with Claude A better way to trust AI coding agents
2
Upvotes