Reviewing agent-written code is risk management rather than reading: how long the change took and how big it is tell you when to look closely.

Added to korrents 10 Aug 2026 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us

Related korrents

Our reading — they may agree, disagree or merely touch the same thing. Closest first: a shared subject counts for most, then how near the wording is.

• A plan that spells out every line of code to change gives you no leverage: it costs as long to read as the pull request, so you end up skimming it and reading the code twice. DHDex Horthy15 Jul 2026similar wording
• Whether agent-written code needs to be good depends entirely on how long it will live: a throwaway single-page tool can be spaghetti, anything maintained cannot. SWSimon Willison19 Mar 2026similar wording
• The code today’s models and agents write is very hard to follow: you get better performance without knowing why, and no way to fix it when it breaks. ESElizabeth Stone19 Jul 2026similar wording
• Agentic code review raises the floor but cannot be trusted, because the model reading the code is the same model that wrote it, and it will tell you the code is great. DHDex Horthy15 Jul 2026similar wording
• Coding agents made implementation cheap without making roadmaps shorter or software better -- the binding constraint was never how fast code gets written. SPSunil Pai14 Aug 2026similar wording

See this on the map →