Ship Fewer Regressions

Code Review & Quality

For: Engineers reviewing PRs — or pre-reviewing their own

Pre-review sweep: your own PR through a security-and-edge-case lens

The PR is 'done'. Run the pre-review sweep so human reviewers spend their attention on design — not on nits and the missed null check.

Copy & paste into your own LLM · open in archive →

You are a staff engineer reviewing a pull request. I will paste the diff and its context. Produce:

A) REVIEW TABLE — columns: file/line reference, severity (blocker / major / nit), category (correctness, security, performance, readability, tests), the issue in one sentence, and a suggested fix as a concrete code change.

B) EDGE-CASE LIST — inputs and states the diff does not handle: empty, null, concurrent access, oversized input, malformed input, permission-denied.

C) VERDICT — approve or request-changes, plus the 2 highest-risk lines in the diff and why.

Inputs: [PASTE DIFF] · [WHAT THE CHANGE DOES + WHY] · [LANGUAGE/FRAMEWORK + TEAM CONVENTIONS]

Rules: Do not invent code that is not in the diff — reference only pasted lines. Any claim about behavior you cannot see (callers, config, upstream state) must be marked "verify in repo". Never echo secrets or keys, and do not include proprietary code beyond what I pasted.

Why it works: LLM review works best as a filter before human review — the machine catches the mechanical 80% so humans argue about design. Severity plus category forces triage instead of a wall of nits, and the 'verify in repo' rule prevents confident-but-wrong claims about code the model cannot see.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

Fix the Cause, Not the Symptom

Debugging & Root-Cause

For: Engineers investigating production bugs under time pressure

Root-cause interrogation: a hypothesis ladder from a bug report

Prod bug, vague repro, clock ticking. Structure the investigation before you start changing code at random.

Why it works: Ranked hypotheses with discriminating tests is how senior engineers actually debug — it converts panic into a binary-search plan. The prevention step turns one fix into a class fix, which is the difference between closing a ticket and improving the system.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

Decide in Writing

Architecture & Design Docs

For: Engineers proposing systems, migrations, and big refactors

Design doc skeleton with the alternatives you'll actually be asked about

New system or big refactor. Draft the design doc with real alternatives and failure modes before the review meeting drafts it for you.

Why it works: Design reviews go sideways on missing alternatives and unstated failure modes. Writing rejected-because with reversibility does the reviewers' job for them, and honest measured-vs-estimated labels on scale numbers are what separate a design doc from a pitch.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

Break It Before Users Do

Testing

For: Engineers writing test plans for new features and risky changes

Test-plan generator: risk-ranked cases from a diff or spec

Feature complete, coverage thin. Generate the test plan ranked by what would actually hurt in production.

Why it works: Coverage percentages lie; risk-ranked behavior coverage does not. Priority-by-blast-radius keeps the suite lean enough to maintain, and the non-determinism checklist targets the exact flake sources that quietly destroy a team's trust in CI.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

Compound Your Hours

Dev Productivity

For: Engineers and leads reclaiming time from toil and context switches

Toil audit: find the hours a week your workflow is leaking

You suspect the week disappears into builds, reviews, and context switches. Audit it and get an automation plan with paybacks.

Why it works: Payback-sorted toil is the difference between automation as procrastination and automation that compounds. Capping quick wins at an hour forces starts instead of plans, and systems-not-people keeps the audit honest and safe to share with the team.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

What you did NOT get today (Pro)

Prompt of the Week (Pro)

This week's bonus: a legacy-code characterization prompt that wraps an untested module in behavior-pinning tests before you touch it — with a strict no-invented-behavior rule so the tests document what IS, not what should be.

Which section is most useful to you this week?

One tap — it shapes which prompt leads next week.

What would you like to see more of?

Get all five sections — every day

Pro unlocks all 5 sections’ prompts each issue, plus the full searchable archive. $14.99/mo.