Original Summary

Hey everyone, I'm building GiviLoop, a free CLI and MCP tool under the MIT license. It gives your coding agent a second opinion on selected code changes. Then the agent checks that advice against the code and tests, and records what was confirmed, dismissed or still needs checking. The second model can be wrong too. You can use a local model or an existing web chat instead of paying for a separate API review. Chat quotas still apply, and your coding agent still uses tokens. I haven't measured total token savings. Web chats have a manual copy and paste workflow. Optional browser automation is experimental, and some providers restrict automated access. Local models avoid that website dependency. I'd love a few people to try it on one real change. Did the review catch something useful, invent a bug, or take more effort than it saved? That's the feedback I need. Contributors are welcome too, especially around TypeScript, MCP, local models and setup. Code, demo and setup: https://github.com/vgflutter/GiviLoop What would make you keep a second review in your workflow, and what would make you turn it off?   submitted by   /u/Smart_Ad500 [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：商业与市场研究
  • 分类依据：内容涉及商业、投资或市场动态
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SideProject
  • 发布时间：2026/9/24 03:54:45