Can one AI model reliably review code another AI wrote?
Not on its own. A second model can share the first one's blind spots, and it can only guess about code it was not shown. It will find real problems, and it will also report some that are not there.
It helps to use reviewers from different vendors that work independently, to keep only findings tied to files and lines that exist, and to block only on problems the reviewers find independently. A person still decides. A clean result is not an approval.
- Shared blind spots. A reviewing model can accept the same wrong assumption the writing model made, and say nothing about it.
- It sees only what it is given. A reviewer that reads only the diff guesses about the callers and subclasses it cannot open, and some of those guesses are wrong.
- One opinion reads like a fact. A single reviewer's hunch looks exactly like a confirmed defect in the comment, and it rates its own severity.
- 1Independent reviewers from different vendors. Each review runs reviewers from more than one vendor (Codex and Claude on the default panel), independently, on the same diff and the same instructions. In the demo review, one reviewer found nothing to report and the other found three things.
- 2The code around the change. Veridu looks for the callers, subclasses and other code a change affects and gives it to the reviewers, so fewer findings are guesses about code they could not see.
- 3Findings tied to real files and lines. A finding that cites a file that does not exist, or a line the file does not have, is dropped. That does not make the rest correct.
- 4Only problems found independently block. A review blocks only when two reviewers find the same defect independently and both rate it at or above your blocking threshold. One reviewer's finding, however confident, goes to a human.
The full set of rules for what can block and what is shown: why AI code review is noisy.
It does not make every finding correct, and it does not approve your pull request. Some findings will still be wrong, and some problems will be missed. Read the findings, read the diff, and decide.
So is AI code review reliable?
Not on its own. It finds real problems and it also produces wrong findings. Treat it as a second pair of eyes that points at places to look, not as a verdict.
Why use reviewers from different vendors?
Reviewers miss different things. In the demo review, two reviewers ran on the same diff and one found nothing while the other found three things. That gap is why Veridu runs reviewers from more than one vendor instead of one.
Is a clean result an approval?
No. It says what Veridu checked, so a reviewer can start from there. Veridu never approves a pull request automatically or as the GitHub App, and a person still decides whether to merge.
How accurate is it?
We do not publish an accuracy rate. The demo shows one real review as it ran, including the findings the reviewers disputed, so you can judge the output yourself.
What does it cost?
Up to 20 reviews a month on public GitHub repositories are free, no card. Solo and Team plans add private repositories.
Before the commit (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), or on the pull request (reviewing AI-generated pull requests).