Standing service ai-reviewer-comments-audited-and-tuned-monthly · revised 12 October 2026
Standing service
Keep your AI pull-request reviewer useful, month after month
Each month a sample of your AI reviewer's comments is rated useful, not useful or wrong with a link, the rules are adjusted with your approval, and the trend is shown.
This starts a conversation by email. Nothing is charged, and nothing is read or run, until we have agreed scope, access and terms with you in writing.
The responsibility you hand over
An AI reviewer drifts. Code, rules and tool versions change, comments get noisier or go quiet, and nobody measures it. Without a monthly look at what the reviewer said, the team only notices when they have stopped reading it.
Who it’s for: A team that already runs an AI pull-request reviewer whose comments people have started to ignore.
Usually starts when: Developers say the bot is noisy, or nobody can say whether the rules you wrote last quarter still help.
The result: Each month a sample of the reviewer's comments on your pull requests is rated useful, not useful or wrong, each with a link. Rule changes are proposed with before-and-after counts on a held-back half of the month's pull requests, and a trend line shows whether the share of useful comments is moving.
What stays true, and what we do about it
No response-time guarantee is published for this new service. A target for sending each month's sheet is agreed in writing before it starts.
The service runs once a month after the month closes. It is not a pager and has no round-the-clock cover.
What must remain true
- Each month every sampled comment (30, or all if fewer) has a verdict of useful, not useful or wrong and a link to the comment
- No rule change that mutes a category of comment is proposed or made without your written approval
What we watch
- AI review comments on your pull requests, read through a Read-only account or a monthly export
- Your reviewer's answers to disputed verdicts
When something happens
Scroll the table sideways to read it all.
| When | What we do |
|---|---|
| A month closes. | We sample the comments, rate them, test any proposed rule change on a held-back half of the month's pull requests and send the sheet, the trend and the summary. |
| There is no rule file yet, or the sheet shows the current rules are mostly ignored by the tool. | We offer the one-off job that writes a rule set from your past pull requests and tests it on a held-back third. Linked job: AI reviewer rules from your old PRs |
| Fewer than 20 AI comments arrive in a month. | We say there are too few to show a trend, make no rule proposal and keep the sample for the next month. |
| Your reviewer disputes a verdict. | Their verdict replaces ours in the sheet and both are shown. |
| A comment suggests disabling a check, skipping a test or lowering a threshold. | We list it first in the summary and propose a rule that forbids it, for your approval. |
We do on our own
- Read the AI comments and rate them
- Test a proposed rule on a held-back half of the month's pull requests in a sandbox
- Open a pull request with a rule change for you to review
We ask you first
- Any rule change
- Any change to what counts as useful
- Any wider access to the repository
We escalate to you when
- The share of comments rated useful falls two months running
- A comment leaks something that looks like a secret
- The tool or its model changes in a way that affects comments
How you know it held. Each month your reviewer re-rates 10 sampled comments from the sheet, a fresh 30 if more than 2 differ, and the sheet shows the counts by verdict and the number of comments in the month.
How we keep it true
This service is never finished. Each month's summary shows whether what it watches stayed true, and it continues until you end it.
Make your AI pull-request reviewer follow your rules, tested on your old PRs Job Optional
Rules for the AI reviewer you already run, written from your past reviewed pull requests and tested on a held-back third of them, with a noise cap and a list of what the rules cannot catch.
Bought separately, once
The one-off job that writes the first rule set from your past pull requests and tests it on a held-back third.
What is included, and what is not
- The monthly sample sheet with a verdict and a link per comment
- Proposed rule changes with before-and-after counts
- The trend line and a short summary
Included
- One repository and one named review tool, with at least 20 AI comments a month
- A monthly sample of 30 comments, or all of them if fewer, each rated with a link
- Proposed rule changes as a pull request you merge, with before-and-after counts on a held-back half of the month's pull requests, split by script before anyone reads them
- A trend line over the months, and a short written summary
Not included
- Reviewing your pull requests ourselves; the tool you run does that
- Muting any category of comment without your written approval
- Making a bot an approver or changing required approvals
- Fixing the code the reviewer flags
- A promise that the share of useful comments will rise
How we know it’s done
Agreed with you before work starts. Each check produces evidence you keep.
Each month every sampled comment has a verdict and a working link to the comment.
Evidence: The monthly sheet, with a script check for missing verdicts or links.
No rule change that mutes a category was made without your written approval.
Evidence: The rule change log with your approvals, and the merged pull requests.
Your reviewer re-rates 10 of the month's comments, picked by script with a fixed seed. If more than 2 of the 10 differ from our verdict, your reviewer rates a fresh 30 and their ratings replace ours for that month before the trend is drawn.
Evidence: The re-rated rows, the disagreement count and, if it was triggered, the fresh 30.
Our account made no change in your repository except opening rule pull requests from a fork.
Evidence: Your own audit log for the month.
Sign-off. You read each sheet and tell us whether the sample size and the rules still suit you. A month counts as delivered when you have received the sheet and the summary.
If it fails. If the export is missing or has changed shape we say so, explain what we need and do not guess. If the service is not working for you, you can end it at the end of any month.
When it fits, and when we stop
It fits when
- A review tool already running, with an instruction file you can edit and merge
- At least 20 AI comments a month on one repository
- A named reviewer on your side who answers disputed verdicts
- A read-only export of the AI comments, or a Read-only bot account
We stop and tell you if
- Two months run without an answer to disputed verdicts or rule proposals
- Fewer than 20 AI comments a month, so no trend can be shown
- The tool changes so the rules can no longer be tested
What could go wrong
The service reads comments and proposes rule changes as pull requests. Close one and nothing changes; revert a merged one and the tool returns to its earlier rules. Ending the service changes nothing in your repository.
Scroll the table sideways to read it all.
| Risk | How we handle it |
|---|---|
| A sample of 30 comments is small, so a month-to-month change can be noise. | The trend line shows the counts and says when a change is within what a sample of that size can show. |
| Verdicts depend on your reviewer's feedback and drift if they stop answering. | Disputed verdicts follow your reviewer, and the service stops after two months without answers. |
| A rule that mutes a category hides a real problem. | No muting without your written approval, and the sheet lists every category affected. |
A separate automated reviewer checks the work before hand-over. Your named reviewer answers disputed verdicts and approves every rule change. No human supervisor is included unless your agreement names one, and at launch the work is largely automated.
Questions
Do you review our pull requests?
No. We audit what your AI reviewer said and tune its rules. Your people review your code.
What if we have no rule file yet?
The one-off rules job writes the first one from your past pull requests. You can start the monthly service without it.
Can the service mute noisy comments by itself?
No. We propose a rule change and you approve it. Nothing is muted without your written approval.
Also part of
Send an enquiry
Send us
- The tool you run and how many pull requests a month you merge
- Who would answer disputed verdicts
- No code, tokens or logins in the first enquiry
Later, once you agree
- A read-only export of the AI comments and the pull requests they were on, or a Read-only bot account
- The current rule file
- The name of your reviewer
You keep the repository, the review tool and every setting. We read comments through a Read-only bot account or a monthly export, and propose rule changes only as pull requests you merge. Our automated agents read the AI comments and pull requests you export or open to that account, in a sandbox; we make no "no training" or "no storage" promise here, and the agreement names the model provider, country, retention and training status before anything is shared.
Email fallback: open your mail app
If website submission is unavailable, review and send the fallback email yourself. An email fallback is not a website receipt. Or write to hello@syntheticindustry.ai with “ai-reviewer-comments-audited-and-tuned-monthly” as the subject.