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
- BELL: Open-Source Stack Combines Browserbase, Eve, iMessage and Stripe Link for Personal Agents — jeff_weinstein · 2026-10-27
- Legora runs 2,000 parallel agent evals on Modal Sandboxes for legal AI — blelbach · 2026-10-27
- Two engineers rebuilt a FedEx supplier's billing core in 3.5 months vs an estimated 7-8 — alex_verem · 2026-10-27
- GPT-6.1 Terra scores 48 on AA Coding Agent Index at one-third the cost of GPT-5.6 Terra — ArtificialAnlys · 2026-10-27
- Shift-1 router cuts coding agent spend up to 55% while keeping SWE-bench accuracy — ypatil125 · 2026-10-27
- Non-coder vibe-codes a Godot JRPG with Claude Code in two weeks, music and art synced — ADHDavid · 2026-10-27