Skip to content

Pull Request Review

Structured review of a diff: correctness first, then risk, tests and readability.

promptDevelopment Testing·AEAether Library·v4.1·4.9 ★ (640)·9.6K runs·Updated 7d agoDemo item · example figures
Open in runner

When to use

  • Before requesting human review on a PR.
  • Auditing a large diff for regressions.

Prompt

Click a variable for its definition
Review pull request . Context about the codebase: Order findings by severity: 1. Correctness bugs (with the exact input that breaks) 2. Security and data-loss risks 3. Missing or weak tests 4. Readability issues worth fixing now For each finding give file:line, the problem, and a minimal fix. Do not list style nits unless is true. If the diff is correct, say so plainly.

Variables

{{pr_url}} *Fetched through the GitHub MCP server when connected. · e.g. https://github.com/org/repo/pull/128url
{{context}}Conventions or constraints the reviewer should know.textarea
{{include_nits}}Report style-only comments. · e.g. falseboolean

Input and output

Expected input
A PR URL. Requires a GitHub MCP connection to fetch the diff.
Expected output
Severity-ordered findings, each with location and minimal fix.

Version history

  1. v4.12026-09-12 · aetherCurrentFindings now require the breaking input.
  2. v42026-07-01 · aetherFetch diff via MCP instead of pasted text.text not recorded
  3. v32026-04-18 · aetherSeverity ordering.text not recorded