Alternating Agent Reviews Can Make Code Worse
jimmykoppel · x · 2026-07-15
I've pushed the "Codex review → Claude fix" loop to its absolute limit.
For large PRs, this iterative back-and-forth often degrades quality, leaving you worse off than the original draft. The author concludes that having multiple agents continuously hunt for issues with fresh context doesn't automatically yield better code. True human judgment is still required to dictate which issues are actually "must-fix" and which changes are worth accepting.
More from coding & agent
- GPT-6 Astra beats Factorio with enemies in 44 in-game hours at ~$4,500 API cost — liminal_bardo · 2026-09-11
- 105 hidden bugs, 2 repos: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash fixes 24 at $1.80 vs Opus 5's 27 at $51.33 — ChartsJournalX · 2026-09-11
- Investment Analyst Asks How to Build a Claude-Based Diligence Agent Stack — Careless_Tie2286 · 2026-09-11
- Treating agents like 50 First Dates: a 3-layer context system so every conversation doesn't start from zero — evielync · 2026-09-11
- Running the Firefox MCP on Android via Termux, ngrok, and mcp-proxy — Nervous-Strain7544 · 2026-09-11
- SmolVM open-sources persistent computer infrastructure for agents that outlive chat sessions — aniketmaurya · 2026-09-11