Merge review agent
Every pull request is reviewed before a human opens it.
- Reviews against your own standards file, not a generic rubric
- Names the defect, the line and the reason
- Runs on the merge, before review time is spent
AI employee · Engineering
It reviews every merge — then chases the fix until it lands.
Most review tools comment and move on. Commenting is the easy half. This one records the defect and keeps asking about it.
- Code and database objects
- Your standards, not a rubric
- Never merges, never pushes
- CERT-IN certified
ci · pull request #418Review agent
35+
AI agents running in our own production
- 14 files reviewed against your standardsClean
- usp_ResultPublish — index missing on joinMajor
- Finding from 6 Aug still open — leads copiedChasing
It never merges and never pushes. It reviews, reports and follows up.
The everyday problem
The review happened. The fix did not.
Findings are read, agreed with, and left. Nobody tracks which ones closed, so the same defect ships twice and the standards document becomes a thing people cite rather than follow.
What it does
Six agents, one role
Database review agent
The stored procedure that became a table scan gets caught.
- Reads only the procedures and tables that changed
- Checks security, scalability, simplicity and excess joins
- The layer that lives outside your repository
The audit ladder
The finding gets fixed, instead of getting read.
- Three reminders, three days apart
- Each one widens the audience by a rung
- Still open after nine days, it is marked overdue
Auto-close agent
Nobody ticks off defects that were fixed on Tuesday.
- A later review of the same file closes it
- One click closes it from the reminder itself
- Closed findings stay in the record
Severity gate
Only what is worth an interruption interrupts anyone.
- Major, blocker and critical enter the ladder
- Minor observations stay in the report and chase nobody
- You set where that line sits
Weekly developer report
A quiet week shows as a zero, not as silence.
- Commits, files, lines and repositories, per developer
- Everyone on the roster appears, including the zeros
- Deterministic — no model, no token cost
Ready to see it in action?
Point us at one repository — we’ll review last month’s merges and send you the findings.
Or call +91 95525 86428
What changes
Before and after
| Today | With the agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Review depth | Whatever time allows | Every merge, same rubric |
| Database changes | Reviewed by nobody | Reviewed daily |
| After the comment | Hope | Nine days of follow-up |
| Team visibility | Asked in standup | Mailed every Monday |
How the work moves
Who does which step
- 1AI agent
Merge opened
Picked up within minutes.
- 2AI agent
Reviewed
Against your standards, not a default.
- 3AI agent
Reported
Findings mailed, each one tracked.
- 4Your team
Fixed
The part nobody is replacing.
- 5AI agent
Verified
Closed when the defect is gone.
Where it stops It never merges, never pushes and never rewrites your code. It reviews, reports and follows up — the commit is always yours.
What happens after the comment
Nine days, three rungs, then overdue
Day 0 — reviewed
The merge is reviewed and every finding is recorded.
Day 3 — the developer
First reminder, to the person who wrote the code.
Day 6 — the leads
Second reminder, with the repository leads copied in.
Day 9 — escalation
Final reminder, with your escalation list copied in.
After day 9 — overdue
Marked overdue. Mailing stops; the finding stays open.
35+
AI agents running in our own production
- 100%
- Platform uptime
- 500+
- Customers worldwide
- 2
- Cloud regions, monitored 24×7
Questions we are asked
Before you commit
Does our source code leave our network?
It does not have to. The agent runs on your infrastructure, inside your network, against your repositories. If you would rather it ran on hosted infrastructure instead, we will say exactly which model sees what and where it runs, before you commit to anything.
Is this replacing our reviewers?
No. It reviews before a human does, so your reviewers spend their time on design and intent rather than on naming conventions and missing indexes. It has no merge rights and never will.
What standards does it review against?
Yours. We start from your existing standards document, or write one with your leads in the first week if there is not one. A generic rubric produces generic findings that teams learn to ignore.
Does it really review databases too?
Yes, and it is the part most teams have no coverage for. It reads the stored procedures and table definitions that changed since the last run and reviews those for security, scalability and excess joins — the layer that never appears in a pull request.
What stops it filing forty trivial comments on every merge?
The severity gate. Only major, blocker and critical findings chase anyone; minor observations stay in the report for reference. You set where the line sits, and you can move it once you have seen a month of output.
What happens to a finding nobody fixes?
It escalates on a fixed ladder — the developer, then the leads, then your escalation list — and is then marked overdue and stops mailing. It stays open in the record, so the count of overdue defects is a number you can actually manage.
Where to go next
Engineering
AI employee for code review
Every merge and every changed database object reviewed against your standards — then each defect chased to closure.
IT operations
Agents that prove the job ran
Monitoring that reports what your scheduled jobs produced, not just that the server answered a ping.
Start here
Agent Readiness Sprint
Two weeks, one working agent on your own systems, and a costed plan for the rest.
Start with one repository.
See the findings on your own code before you decide anything. The Readiness Sprint scopes the rest.
Book an Agent Readiness Sprint
Or call +91 95525 86428