Build blueprint
CI Review Triage
A GitHub check that assigns review depth, owners, and required test classes to every pull request.
- Problem
- Repositories waste reviewer attention on harmless diffs while risky changes can look deceptively small.
- Why Jev
- Each diff needs several parallel labels and risk scores rather than a review essay.
- Architecture
- Diff metadata → parallel risk/security/test questions → branch protection policy → check run.
- Current alternative
- CODEOWNERS, path rules, or expensive LLM review of every diff.
- Jev advantage
- Semantic triage can happen on every push before deeper reviewers are invoked.
- Unknowns
- How much code context fits without losing calibration.
Why this confidence: Strong primitive fit; independent accuracy evidence is not yet available.
This is an authored hypothesis derived from the research corpus. Nothing here demonstrates product demand, or that Jev performs well on this particular workload. Run the validation experiment before building past the MVP.
Sources
Limitations
- How much code context fits without losing calibration.
- This is a research hypothesis, not evidence of product demand or Jev performance in this workflow.
Supporting research
- Cascade router PlausibleA cheap decision chooses whether to use rules, a small model, a premium model, a specialist, or a human.
- Goblin HR ObservedA small inspectable demo that evaluates candidates for an impossible mission.
- Routing, classification, verification, and workflow control are the dominant early mental models. PlausibleThose categories recur in the collected launch discussion and align with the documented output primitives.
- Parallel decision matrix PlausibleOne state is evaluated against many named questions, replacing repeated prompt/parse cycles.