Live Demo · Engineering Agent

Reviewing a 12-file pull request

Watch the Engineering Agent review a multi-file PR, post structured comments, and catch the one missing test before a senior reviewer wakes up.

AgentPrime Engineering Agent
healthy
  • .01 Open PR queue 34 open median age 1h 48m
  • .02 Reviews this week 127 PRs +18 vs. last week
  • .03 Reviewer load saved 92 hours
  • .04 Missed regressions 0 since deploy two months ago
Operating across
  • GitHub
  • Linear
  • Datadog
  • Buildkite
  • Slack

The Scenario

A staff engineer opens a PR at 11:14 PM touching twelve files across the billing service. In the old world this PR would sit in queue until the next morning, then take two hours of focused review time. The Engineering Agent picks it up in seven seconds.

Company
Series-C platform · 80-person engineering org · 14 services
Stack
GitHub · Linear · Datadog · Buildkite · Slack

The Workflow

7 frames. The agent's work, end-to-end, in 7 seconds.

Queue 11:14 PM · GitHub PR #4419

Agent pulls the PR description, the linked Linear ticket, the diff, and the affected files' recent history.

Author
@s.lehmann (Staff Engineer)
Title
Refactor billing webhooks to async queue
Files
12 (+842 / -311)
Linked ticket
BILL-2204
CI status
Pending
Reasoning trace

Reads the PR diff, the three files most often touched alongside these, the team's own style guide, and the historical regression log for the billing service.

  1. 1 Two new functions added — both follow the existing handler naming convention.
  2. 2 Webhook handler tests updated for 4 of the 5 modified handlers — one untouched.
  3. 3 Async queue choice (Redis Streams) consistent with prior decision in BILL-1844.
Decision Policy: ENG-REVIEW-2026.1 · Test-coverage policy

PR is in good shape overall. One missing test, two style nits, one suggestion to consolidate error handling. Nothing blocking — but the missing test should land before merge.

  • Missing test: stripe.invoice.payment_failed handler — high-traffic path
  • Two style nits: variable naming in retry handler, comment density
  • Suggestion: pull duplicated try/catch in handlers 2 and 4 into shared helper
Action → GitHub

Agent posts a structured review with one 'required' comment (missing test) and three 'optional' suggestions. Each comment includes a code snippet and a citation back to the relevant convention.

Review verdict
Request changes (1 required)
Comments posted
4 (1 required · 3 optional)
Code snippets
Inline patches included
References
ENG-REVIEW-2026.1 · BILL-1844
Author notified
@s.lehmann
Action → Slack · #billing-eng

Lightweight note in #billing-eng so the wider team sees this PR is in motion. No tagging, no interruption.

Visibility post
PR #4419 · async webhook refactor
Status
Reviewed by agent · 1 required comment
Ready for human re-review
After missing test added
Estimated re-review time
~15 minutes
Audit log 23:14:38
[2026-05-26 23:14:38]  eng-agent  PR_REVIEWED  pr=4419  service=billing  files=12  diff=842/311  comments=4  required=1  optional=3  policy=ENG-REVIEW-2026.1  context_files_loaded=18  duration=7s
Queue 7:42 AM

By the time the staff engineer's reviewer is online the next morning, the PR is already addressed: missing test added, comments resolved. Time-to-merge: under 12 hours instead of 3 days.

PR status
Ready for human re-review
Author response
Test added · 2 nits applied
Reviewer load saved
≈ 90 minutes
Queue remaining
33 open

Outcome at scale

16 hours → 3 hours

Across a full sprint this loop runs across every PR. Senior engineers stay in flow on the hard problems while the queue clears itself overnight.

Book a Discovery Call