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
- Devin Outposts aims to run AI agents on any machine, from Mac minis to Kubernetes clusters — blaizedsouza · 2026-07-22
- Devin adds e2b sandboxes for remote agent execution — badphilosopher · 2026-07-22
- Hermes Agent Refactoring Proposal: Decoupling via Event Bus and Monorepo Slicing — Promptmethus · 2026-07-22
- ty now reads Pydantic config keywords and field metadata — charliermarsh · 2026-07-22
- Pensar Launches AI Security Agent to Autonomously Discover and Patch 0-Days — andriy_mulyar · 2026-07-22
- ty adds first-class Pydantic support, including strict and lax field handling — charliermarsh · 2026-07-22