Stop merging drifting PRs
Reduce the verification bottleneck with high-signal hotspots in every PR.
Repo-aware structural signals (not style, not nitpicks) — directly in PR comments.
Shorten time-to-trust without slowing dev flow.
No credit card · Install 2 min · Default: warn (not block) · Uninstall anytime
A complete workflow
Understand it. Prevent it. Track it. Control the signal.
TRIAGE
Hotspots + per-file risk (attention map)
ALIGN
Repo baseline (“what’s normal here”)
DECIDE
Actions: require / warn / pass (policy)
EXPLORE
Full report + glossary
Install once. Every PR gets an attention map
Drift hides inside “reasonable” changes
Tests can pass while architectural drift accumulates.
The code works — the structure shifts.
The cost shows up later: higher cognitive load, slower changes, more regressions.
- AI increases PR volume and PR size.
- Humans still own judgment and accountability.
- The bottleneck moved: from writing code → to validation and trust.
AI optimizes locally. Structure breaks globally
- Agents can generate locally-correct code at machine speed.
But they can violate repo norms, boundaries, and contracts — even when tests pass. - We surface repo-level drift, boundaries, and blast radius — so reviewers can triage risk fast.
- Think: an attention map for PRs — not another wall of comments.
So reviewers can triage risk fast — without reading 2,000 lines.
Works great when PRs are authored by agents (Cursor/Copilot/etc.) — drift shows up as ‘valid code’.
PR comment
Risk summary + top hotspots
Status check
Fail / warn / pass — configurable
Default: warn, not block
Full report (HTML/MD/JSON)
Detailed reasoning when you need depth
What Revieko surfaces (high-signal structural drift)
# Revieko PR review: High risk | struct_risk=69.49 | hotspots=10 def _goal_generator(history): # ← hotspot: struct_pattern_break (yield + state) if all(norm(goal - g) > 2.0 for g in history[-3:]): # ← hotspot: struct_pattern_break (complex filter) yield goal damped = J.T @ J + damping * np.eye(N) # ← hotspot: struct_pattern_break (algorithmic shift) class _StateManager: # ← hotspot: struct_pattern_break (new abstraction) pass
Architectural drift — new abstractions and responsibilities appear or shiftBoundary drift — cross-module moves that increase couplingHidden coupling — implicit dependencies introducedState introduced — stateful objects appear where the repo is typically statelessControl-flow complexity — generators with state, dense branching, deep nestingHeuristic drift — mixed rules without clear rationalePattern breaks — structure deviates from repo baseline (the “almost right” trap)
These hotspots are for triage: the top 5% to review first.
What it does NOT do
- No style nitpicks (naming, formatting, typing-only changes)
- No generic best-practices spam
- No wall of comments — only top hotspots
High signal-to-noise by design
No nitpicks — only structural anomalies.
Pointed highlights, not review spam
Top hotspots concentrate most of the structural risk.
Structural guardrails, not cosmetics
Focused on architecture patterns and repo-specific invariants.
Transparent outputs
A short PR summary for fast triage + a full report when you need depth.
What you get — by role
Faster review triage • Lower cognitive load • Clear ownership of changes
Developers
Less review churn: reviewers focus on hotspots, not everything
Faster time-to-trust for AI-generated changes
Clear “what changed structurally” without long explanations
Tech leads
Repo-specific guardrails that evolve with your codebase
Early detection of architectural drift before it compounds
Better alignment: structure becomes observable in PRs
Engineering Managers
Reduced review drag and review theater risk
More consistent PR gates without blocking flow
A measurable way to track structural risk over time (coming soon)
Plans that grow with you
Start free. Upgrade when it proves value.
FREE
$0
month
Core PR comment + status check
Read-only by default • Runs on diffs • Uninstall anytime
TEAM
pilot
month
Org-wide settings • Reporting • Advanced controls
Best for teams standardizing review guardrails
FAQ
Does it replace code review?
No. It shortens time-to-trust by surfacing where judgment is needed most.
Will this create review theater?
No. Revieko is built for high-signal triage: it surfaces a small set of top hotspots, not a stream of comments.
How does Revieko reduce ownership debt from AI-generated code?
By making structural changes visible and reviewable. Revieko surfaces where the repo’s structure shifts so humans can explicitly accept, adjust, or reject it.
Is this a linter or a security scanner?
No. Linters enforce style; security scanners look for known vulnerabilities.
Revieko highlights repo-abnormal structural changes (boundaries, coupling, algorithm shifts) that often pass normal gates.
How does baseline work?
Revieko learns a repo-specific baseline from history and refreshes over time as your repo evolves.
How is our code handled? Do you store it?
Revieko temporarily fetches your repository to build a repo-specific structural baseline.
After the baseline is built, the raw code is deleted and not stored as source text.
The baseline is a non-reversible structural representation (not human-readable code), so neither the system nor the team can “browse” your code from it.
Does it block merges?
Default: warn, not block. You can configure pass/warn/fail policies later.
Under the hood: structural ML (not LLM semantics)
Revieko uses a dedicated ML model that treats code as structural complexity — not as natural language.
It scores deviations relative to your repo baseline and surfaces high-signal hotspots for review triage.
