code-review

Structured code review reduces false positives by applying an 80% confidence threshold and requiring file:line references for all findings. This process evaluates correctness, security, performance, and maintainability while explicitly labeling uncertainty to minimize noise.

Classifying code review findings by severity standardizes prioritization by categorizing issues as Critical, Major, Minor, or Nitpick. This severity classification requires corresponding actions and helps teams address correctness, security, performance, and maintainability issues effectively.

A multi-layer code review handles security and performance issues by systematically evaluating each domain independently alongside correctness and maintainability. It produces an evidence-backed report with file:line references, escalating only highly confident findings above the 80% threshold.

Automated code review supports post-change auditing by producing a consistent report that includes files reviewed, an overall assessment, and grouped findings. It applies a 4-layer systematic evaluation to verify implementation completion and identify issues after code changes.

Code review with an 80% confidence threshold intentionally filters out low-confidence findings to reduce false positives, but it still reports highly confident issues across all severity levels, including Minor and Nitpick categories, ensuring low-severity issues are captured when evidence is strong.