AI CODE REVIEW
Oct 9, 2024
The Future of Code Reviews: AI vs. Manual Review

Amartya Jha
Founder & CEO, CodeAnt AI
You’re a developer. Deadlines are tight, projects are complex, and the pressure to ship never stops. And yet, there’s one guarantee in your day: code reviews will eat your time.
Here’s what I hear most often:
Code reviews drag on, with PRs piling up and slowing delivery.
Reviewers waste time switching between diffs, Jira tickets, and context just to understand the “why” behind changes.
Security and compliance risks often slip through because reviewers aren’t equipped to catch them.
Review fatigue sets in, leading to shallow checks, nitpicks, or rubber-stamping.
Over the last few months, I’ve spoken with more than 100 engineering leaders. The verdict is unanimous: code reviews are one of the biggest productivity drains in modern software development. They take too long, they’re inconsistent, and they frequently block delivery instead of accelerating it.
What's Going Wrong with Code Reviews?
Code reviews are supposed to safeguard quality, but too often they turn into slow, inconsistent rituals. Reviewers struggle to grasp the purpose behind changes, spend excessive time scanning large submissions, and still miss critical issues. Security gaps slip through, compliance checks arrive too late, and what should be a safeguard becomes a bottleneck.
Here’s where the process consistently breaks down:
Understanding the Purpose Behind Code Changes
When a developer submits new code, the first problem for the reviewer is to understand why these changes were made:
Going Through Large Code Submissions: Developers often submit big chunks of code, especially in fast-moving teams. This makes it hard to see what's important and why certain changes were made.
Connecting Code to Business Needs: Reviewers need to check tools like Jira to make sure the code matches what the business needs, which can be a boring and time-consuming task.
Time-Consuming Process: Just understanding the purpose of the code can take anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes per pull request.
2. Spotting Quality Issues
After figuring out the "why," reviewers need to look for ways to improve the code and explain their suggestions clearly, like:
Suggesting Better Data Structures: Recommending more efficient ways to write the code.
Ensuring Proper Error Handling and Formatting: Making sure the code handles errors properly and follows style guidelines.
Proposing Enhancements: Offering ideas to make the code run faster or be easier to read. This step can take an additional 15 to 20 minutes as the reviewer carefully reviews the code and provides helpful feedback.
3. Identifying Security Problems
Checking for security issues is very important but often missed because of several reasons:
Limited Security Knowledge: Developers may not be experts in security, so they might miss important vulnerabilities.
Common Mistakes: Accidentally leaving passwords or API keys in the code, known as exposed secrets, can cause serious problems.
Risks with Third-Party Code: Using open-source libraries can bring in hidden security problems.
Ineffective Tools: Even when tools exist to detect these issues, they don't always work well or are not well connected to the way developers work. Reviewing for security can take 5 to 10 minutes, but it's essential to prevent serious problems in the future.
4. Ensuring Compliance with Standards
Finally, reviewers must make sure the code follows the required rules and laws:
Complex Compliance Requirements: Rules like SOC 2, ISO, GDPR or HIPAA can be complicated, and developers might not know about them.
Delayed Feedback: Often, compliance teams identify issues after the code is written, leading to doing the work again.
Development Delays: This going back and forth not only slows down the process but also makes developers frustrated.
The Hidden Cost of Code Reviews: How Time Really Adds Up
Think about it. A careful code review can take 25 to 40 minutes per pull request. Now, imagine a team of 100 developers:
Average Code Changes: Each developer makes one code change every two days.
Monthly Pull Requests: That's about 1,500 pull requests in a month.
Total Time Spent: At 25 minutes per pull request, that's 37,500 minutes, or about 26 full workdays spent on code reviews each month. This isn't just a number in theory, we've seen it happen with our customers, especially those at Series C and above. For more details, check out our customer case studies here.
The Bigger the Team, the Bigger the Problem
As development teams grow, these problems increase. Code reviews become a major bottleneck, causing delays and increasing costs. So, how can we make code reviews faster and more effective without lowering the quality?
How AI Is Revolutionizing Code Reviews
AI is reshaping code reviews by cutting through the noise and focusing attention where it matters. From clarifying the purpose of changes to exposing hidden risks, it shifts reviews from a slow safeguard to a fast, reliable layer of quality. Here’s how it works in practice:
Rapidly Understanding Code Changes
AI can help reviewers quickly understand why a change was made:
Summarizing Changes: AI provides a short summary of what the new code does, saving time.
Highlighting Key Differences: It points out important changes from the previous version, so reviewers know where to focus.
Linking to Business Objectives: AI connects code changes directly to business goals or user stories, making the purpose clearer.
Instantly Identifying Critical Issues
AI tools can automatically detect:
Quality Issues: Showing where the code can be improved and providing clear, understandable comments for developers.
Security Vulnerabilities: Finding exposed secrets, insecure code patterns, or risky dependencies that might be missed.
Compliance Violations: Checking if the code meets required standards and regulations, alerting developers immediately. With AI, developers and reviewers can see the biggest problems right away, all in one place.
Enforcing Custom Company Policies
Every company has its own coding standards and best practices. Traditional tools can be inflexible and difficult to change. AI offers a solution:
Learning Your Company's Guidelines: AI understands your specific naming conventions, code structures, and style guidelines.
Adapting Over Time: As it learns from your codebase, AI gets better at enforcing policies and finding differences.
Simplifying Policy Management: Making it easier to manage policies, ensuring everyone follows the same rules.
Providing Immediate Feedback
Adding AI into the code review process means:
Seeing the Effects Right Away: Developers can instantly see how their changes affect the entire system, including upstream and downstream effects.
Instant Alerts: They receive alerts about security, quality, or compliance issues as soon as they submit code.
Fixing Problems Early: Early detection allows issues to be fixed right away, preventing bigger problems later on.
Check out the best AI Code review tools
The benefits of AI in Code Reviews is Significant
Using AI for code reviews offers several benefits:
Time Savings: Reduces the time spent on understanding and reviewing code, freeing up developers to focus on building features.
Enhanced Code Quality and Security: Catch more issues automatically, leading to more robust and secure software.
Effortless Compliance: Keep development process smoother without extra effort.
Increased Productivity: Make the development process all rules smoother, allowing teams to deliver faster.
Why AI Code Reviews Are the Future
Code reviews shouldn’t drain days of developer time or let critical risks slip through. AI turns them from a painful bottleneck into a competitive advantage by catching security gaps, enforcing standards, and cutting review cycles down to minutes instead of hours.
At CodeAnt AI, we have seen teams reclaim entire workweeks every month while shipping faster and safer. The future of code reviews is not manual, slow, and inconsistent. It is AI-driven, context-aware, and built for scale.
Stop wasting time on broken review processes. Try CodeAnt AI today for 14-days free and experience code reviews without the drag.