|
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# AI-Powered Code Review Bot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Tier:** **3 – Advanced**
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An automated code-reviewer that leverages modern LLMs (for example, OpenAI models) to analyze pull requests, suggest improvements, and detect potential issues. The bot integrates with GitHub Actions to run on PRs and can post review comments directly to the PR thread. Over time it can learn team-specific patterns and help enforce consistent style and quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Key benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Faster reviews:** reduce manual review time by surfacing likely issues and refactor opportunities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Fewer bugs:** catch anti-patterns and common mistakes before merge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Consistent style:** learn and enforce team conventions and linting rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## User stories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. **Developer opens a Pull Request** on GitHub.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. **GitHub Action triggers the bot** as part of CI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. **Bot analyzes changed files** and:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Suggests improvements** — refactorings, better naming, and performance tips.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Points out potential bugs or bad practices** — logic errors, anti-patterns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Flags security risks** — e.g., SQL injection patterns, unsafe eval, hardcoded secrets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. **Bot posts comments** and suggestions directly on the PR discussion thread (inline where appropriate).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. **Team members see a summary** in PR checks and can review the bot's recommendations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. **Bot learns team style** (preferred naming, lint rules) and can enforce or warn when deviations occur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Bonus features
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Configurable sensitivity** (strict vs. lenient review modes).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Multi-language support** (JavaScript, TypeScript, Python, Go, Java, etc.).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Review summary report** with an overall code-quality score and actionable items.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Conversational interface:** allow developers to ask the bot follow-up questions on the PR (via comments).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Notifications:** send review results to Slack/Discord channels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Progress tracking:** track individual or team code-quality metrics over time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Useful links & resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- OpenAI API — <https://platform.openai.com/docs>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- GitHub Actions docs — <https://docs.github.com/en/actions>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- GitHub REST API — <https://docs.github.com/en/rest>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- GitHub GraphQL API — <https://docs.github.com/en/graphql>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Semgrep (static analysis) — <https://semgrep.dev/>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- LangChain (pipeline tooling) — <https://langchain.readthedocs.io/>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Implementation notes (brief)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Use the GitHub Actions runner to fetch changed files and metadata for each PR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Combine static analyzers (Semgrep, linters) with an LLM to provide contextual suggestions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Use the GitHub REST or GraphQL API to post inline review comments and a summary check.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Keep configuration in the repo (e.g., `.reviewbot.yml`) so teams can set rules and sensitivity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Example projects
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- [octotree](https://github.com/ovity/octotree)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ujjansh Sundram
1 year ago