If you are good at code review, you will be good at using AI agents

Code review is part of the job, but one of the least enjoyable parts. Developers like _writing_ and that gives the most job satisfaction. AI tools are helpful, but inherently increases the amount of code we have to review with more scrutiny than my colleagues because of how unpredictable - yet convincing - it can be. Why did we create tools that do the fun part and increase the non-fun part? Where are the "code-review" agents at?

Maybe I'm weird but I don't actually enjoy the act of _writing_ code. I enjoy problem solving and creating something. I enjoy decomposing systems and putting them back together in a better state, but actually manually typing out code isn't something I enjoy.

When I use an LLM to code I feel like I can go from idea to something I can work with in much less time than I would have normally.

Our codebase is more type-safe, better documented, and it's much easier to refactor messy code into the intended architecture.

Maybe I just have lower expectations of what these things can do but I don't expect it to problem solve. I expect it to be decent at gathering relevant context for me, at taking existing patterns and re-applying them to a different situation, and at letting me talk shit to it while I figure out what actually needs to be done.

I especially expect it to allow me to be lazy and not have to manually type out all of that code across different files when it can just generate them it in a few seconds and I can review each change as it happens.

the time spent literally typing code into an editor is never the bottleneck in any competently-run project

if the act of writing code is something you consider a burden rather than a joy then my friend you are in the wrong profession

But it's not exactly rewarding to add one more CRUD endpoint. It's a shit-ton of typing in multiple layers.

An LLM can do it in two minutes while I fetch coffee, then I can proceed to add the complex bits (if there are any)