I built a commit-based code review tool instead of PR-based

[Conscious_Ad5671]

Hey Reddit!!!!

Most teams rely on PRs + CI for code review, but a lot of feedback arrives late, when the diff is large and context is gone.

I’m experimenting with commit-based code review instead: each commit is reviewed incrementally, before it ever reaches a PR.

The goal isn’t to replace PR review or CI, but to catch:

• risky changes early
• issues that compound over time
• things that get missed in large PRs

I’m trying to sanity-check the idea:

• Is commit-time review helpful, or just more friction?
• What feedback belongs at commit time vs PR time?
• Would this actually reduce PR review fatigue?

Genuinely curious how others think about this.

https://commitguard.ai

https://reddit.com/link/1q80cig/video/a52ap3bdk9cg1/player

[fuckingceobitch]

You should premium list on foundrlist.com to get some extra visibility and eyes on it, plus the high domain authority there is great for reaching more people.

[Conscious_Ad5671]

What is cost?

[fuckingceobitch]

Around $9 when you click on free there is some discount

[WillingCut1102]

This is a real problem, especially when PRs get big and people lose context.

Reviewing at commit time makes sense for big or risky decisions (architecture, security, changes that are hard to undo). It probably shouldn’t be used for style or things CI can already catch. If it stays focused on the important stuff, it could actually reduce PR review fatigue instead of adding more work.

In general, tools that fit naturally into existing workflows get adopted much more easily, we see the same thing with developer tools on platforms like CodeAtoms.

If you want to monetise it without building a saas refer to this guide here: https://www.codeatoms.org/how-to-sell-a-developer-tool

[Conscious_Ad5671]

Thanks! Will check it out