Job ai-reviewer-compared-on-your-own-pull-requests · revised 12 October 2026
Choose an AI pull-request reviewer by testing up to three on your own old PRs
Up to three AI reviewers run on the same 30 of your old pull requests, with a ranked table, each tool's published price with the date read and a recommendation that lists what was not tested.
You might be seeing
- Every vendor claims fewer false positives, and none of the claims was measured on your code
- A trial lasts about two weeks, which is not long enough to compare three tools by hand
No passwords, keys, card details or admin invites needed to start.
What usually happened
Review tools differ in noise, in what they catch and in price, and the differences show only on your own code and conventions. A short trial on live pull requests gives each tool different work, so the comparison is unfair.
Who it’s for: A team lead choosing an AI pull-request reviewer who does not want to pick from vendor pages and demos.
Usually starts when: You are about to pay per seat for a reviewer, and you have no way to compare the options on your own code.
The result: Up to three named tools are run on the same 30 of your merged pull requests. You receive a table of what each matched, missed and added against your reviewers' own comments, each tool's published price (per seat or per review, with the date read) and what it comes to at your volume, setup effort and a recommendation that says what was not tested.
Check whether this job fits
Answer these without sending code, tickets or logins. Nothing is submitted unless you choose to contact us.
What you get
- The comparison table with links to every pull request and comment
- The rated 20-comment samples
- A dated price sheet
- A recommendation that lists what was not tested
Included
- Up to three named review tools that you can trial, each run on the same 30 merged pull requests
- Runs on a sandbox copy of those pull requests, never on your live pull requests
- A matching rule (for example: same file, within 5 lines, same problem) written down before the runs and applied by script first; your named reviewer settles disputes
- Per tool: comments matched, missed and extra against your reviewers' actionable comments, with a link for each
- A 20-comment sample per tool, rated by your named reviewer
- Price from each vendor's own page, dated, worked out at your pull request volume, and the setup effort
Not included
- Buying seats, negotiating with vendors or signing up for paid plans
- Writing rules for the winning tool; that is a separate job
- More than three tools or more than 30 pull requests
- A security review of any vendor
- A ranking that stays true: tools change monthly, so the table is dated
How we know it’s done
Agreed with you before work starts. Each check produces evidence you keep.
Every tool is run on the same 30 pull requests, and every row of the table links to the pull request and to each comment it counts, matched by the rule written down beforehand.
Evidence: The table with a link in each row, checked by a script for missing links.
Your named reviewer rates 20 comments per tool as useful, not useful or wrong, and the table shows those ratings beside the counts.
Evidence: The rated sample sheets for each tool.
Every price figure cites a vendor page with the date it was read, and the recommendation lists at least what was not tested and the sample size.
Evidence: The price sheet with links and dates, and the recommendation text.
Sign-off. You read the table and the samples, and sign off in writing. Payment follows sign-off.
If it fails. If the agreed checks do not pass, you do not pay for this fixed scope. We hand over what we found and agree whether to stop or re-quote; no surprise work.
When it fits, and when we stop
It fits when
- Tools you can trial on a sandbox copy, and the authority to decide that each vendor sees those pull requests
- 30 merged pull requests with written human review that you can share
- A named reviewer to rate 20 comments per tool
We stop and tell you if
- A tool's terms forbid benchmarking or a trial account cannot be created
- A vendor trial ends before the replay is finished
- Fewer than 30 pull requests have written review comments to compare against
What could go wrong
The job reads copies and writes a report; nothing changes in your repository. Our copies of your pull requests are deleted when the job ends, and you close the trial accounts.
Scroll the table sideways to read it all.
| Risk | How we handle it |
|---|---|
| Thirty pull requests is a small sample, so close results are noise. | The report says where two tools are within a few pull requests of each other and does not rank them apart. |
| Tools change monthly, so the result ages quickly. | Every figure is dated and the table says it describes the tool versions run on that date. |
| Your code goes to each vendor. | That is your decision, written into the agreement per tool. Runs use sandbox copies and no live pull request is touched. |
A separate automated reviewer checks the work before hand-over. Your named reviewer rates the samples and decides which differences matter. No human supervisor is included unless your agreement names one, and at launch the work is largely automated.
How we deliver
We arrange the work and independent review, then show you the result against the agreed checks. You keep authority over your systems.
- Agree the tools, the 30 pull requests and the matching rule in writing
- Receive the sandbox copy of redacted pull requests and your reviewers' comments
- Run each tool on the same pull requests in your trial accounts
- Match every tool comment to your reviewers' comments, with a link for each
- Separate automated reviewer checks the table; your marker rates 20 comments per tool
- Hand over the table, price sheet and a recommendation with its limits
This is a one-off job, not emergency cover or a subscription. We confirm eligibility, price, start window and delivery date before you accept, and work starts only after agreed inputs, secure access and permissions are in place. Model usage up to a cap we state in writing is in the price, and an enquiry creates no charge or booking.
Need to keep it working?
To make the chosen tool follow your own rules, the rules-from-your-pull-requests job is offered separately.
Ongoing work is separately scoped and quoted: no monitoring, response-time guarantee or automatic subscription is included in this job.
Mention the responsibility you need in your enquiry.
What you can check
This is a new service. We have not delivered this job for a client yet.
Other ways to get this done
- Run the trials yourself on live pull requests. It costs no cash, but each tool then reviews different work.
- Use GitHub's own review feature first. Its documentation lists its per-review cost and what it skips. docs.github.com
Questions
Do you recommend the cheapest tool?
We recommend on the evidence in the table and say what was not tested. Price is one column, not the verdict.
Will the tools comment on our live pull requests?
No. Runs use a sandbox copy of past pull requests.
What if the tools are within a few pull requests of each other?
We say they are not separated at this sample size, and show the price and setup effort instead.
Send an enquiry
Send us
- The two or three tools you are considering, how many developers you have and how many pull requests you merge a month
- Roughly how many merged pull requests with review comments you have
- No code, tokens or logins in the first enquiry
Later, once you agree
- A sandbox copy of 30 merged pull requests with their review comments, redacted by you
- Trial accounts you create and hold for the named tools
- The name of the person who rates the samples
You keep your repository and create the trial accounts; we work on a sandbox copy of past pull requests with a Read-only bot account, never on live pull requests. The tools run in trial accounts you create. We read the redacted sandbox copy of 30 pull requests and the tool comments 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-compared-on-your-own-pull-requests” as the subject.