You're responsible for code you don't fully understand.
Most of it, an agent wrote. mergecomplete turns the diff into a review: what's risky, what's not, and where to look first. Understand it in seconds, and sign off knowing what's actually there.
You didn't write it. You still sign off on it.
Eight tickets today, each one a diff an agent wrote in minutes.
Read every line and the time it saved you evaporates. Skim it and you're guessing. Either way, your name is on the merge.
The review.
mergecomplete replaces the diff with a review: every file and function that moved, grouped by the part of the system it touches. Read it in seconds, and know what's risky before you open a single file.
-
The verdict, before you scroll
Three ranked lines in plain language:
- CdssDetailsRow.tsx does not compile
- seed flag left on in CdssOrderRequest
- useRowState() is unreachable
Five seconds, and you already know where to look.
-
The note, not the diff
Between the diagram and the source sits a note: the code restated as pseudocode, with the reasoning inline. It is not a summary of the diff. When a file is mid-refactor and does not compile, the note renders both halves separately, because intent only reads in the new code and current behavior only reads in the old. No diff view does that.
-
Risk on an unchanged file
Change state and risk are independent. A file nobody touched can be the riskiest node in the diagram, because of what changed around it.
The reviewer isn't the author.
mergecomplete keeps the model that reviews a change independent of the model that wrote it. A team can require that code from one agent is checked by a different one; the trace shows which model signed off. Separation of duties, for agents.
Fits the workflow you already have.
Your coding agent already talks to git. mergecomplete gives it two more tools:
latest, to work off the current base, and
submit, to send the change for review.
That works from inside Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, or a plain terminal. GitHub stays the remote: where the result shows up, not where review happens.
- latest
- work off the current base
- submit
- send the change for review
For whoever signs off on the change.
Solo on a repo, running review for a team, or setting policy for an org: it's the same job. Decide whether an AI-written change is safe to ship, without reading every line.
No procurement, no team rollout: just one repo, and nobody else's permission. That's what getting in early gets you.
Get early access.
The review surface is in build now. Leave your email and we'll bring you in as it opens.