Participation
See who reviews and where that attention concentrates. Discuss capacity and sharing context with the team.
Explore the applications
Understand what happens after a review comment.
Releezy Guardian follows review participation and patterns of changes after comments. Use that evidence to distribute your team’s attention and calibrate review agents.
Turn review history into a better practice.
Observe patterns, examine examples and agree on what deserves more attention in the next round.
Changes after comments
Use the signal of a later commit to the same file to choose examples that deserve a closer reading.
Review criteria
Compare what reviewers raise with project priorities. Refine agent instructions and team agreements.
Finish the conversation with a concrete adjustment.
The metric suggests where to look. Examples help your team decide what to change.
-
Choose a scope
Observe review activity for a repository and period in Releezy Guardian.
Releezy Guardian -
Read the examples
Examine the comment and file history. Consider the signal’s scope before drawing a conclusion.
Methodology -
Calibrate the next review
Update team criteria and the configuration of the project’s review agents.
Releezy Reviewer
Frequently asked questions.
How should we interpret effectiveness?
The aggregate signal identifies a commit after the comment that touched the same file. Examine the comment, the change and the task context to understand what happened and decide which criteria to adjust.
Do humans and agents have the same eligibility criteria?
For reviewers identified as agents, the analysis considers blocking comments. For humans, there is no severity filter. This scope should be considered when interpreting results.
Can I follow other review agents?
Yes. Releezy Guardian analyzes reviewers recorded in the repository, including people, Releezy Reviewer and identified agents from other vendors.
Give your next review more focus.
Let’s look at your team’s history and choose which criteria to adjust.