Show HN: I built a tool to assist AI agents to know when a PR is good to go (opens in new tab)

If there are CI failures or obvious issues that another AI can identify, why not have the agent keep going until those are resolved? This tool just makes that process more token efficient. Seems pretty useful to me.

The reality is that probably 99.9999% of code bases on this earth (but this might drop soon, who knows) pre-date LLMs and organizing them in a way that coding agents can produce consistent results from sprint to sprint, will need a big plumbing work from all dev teams. And that will include refactoring, documentation improvements, building consensus on architectures and of course reshaping the testing landscape. So SWE's will have a lot of dirty work to do before we reach the aforementioned "scale".

However, a lot of platforms are being built from ground-up today in a post-CC (claude code) era . And they should be ready to hit that scale today.

And yes there are plenty of use cases were ai code doesn't hurt anyone even if it gets merged automatically...

See it as an interesting new field of r&d...

And you can do a more exhaustive test later, after the agents are done running amok to merge various things.

The linked page explains how this fits into a development workflow

eg.

> A reviewer wrote “consider using X”… is that blocking or just a thought?

> AMBIGUOUS - Needs human judgment (suggestions, questions)

So gtg builds all of that in and deterministically determines whether or not there are any actionable comments, and thus you can block the agent from moving forward until all actionable comments are thoroughly reviewed, acted upon or acknowledged, at which point it will change state and allow the PR to be merged.