> the developer that was supposed to write the code, only has to review it.

But more often than not that developer ends up reviewing far more lines of code due to the typical verbosity of an LLM.

I am/was writing up an interesting hypothesis with Claude's help. But I redid the most important parts of the data pipeline manually. As in went in and cmd-c + cmd-v'ed the data by hand to create a reference, and I'm randomly spot checking 33% of the larger records.

The analysis itself; I'm doing it by hand.

Why not the developer write the code, then the AI review the code, and then finally a signoff from another human?

Far too often people think productivity is the point. Maybe the point is developer's understanding of the product IS the product?

You're not engineering black boxes, you're engineering legible boxes.

Isn’t there a code review agent?