Skip to content

Use case

A pull request reviewer that comments freely and merges never

Run Codex, Claude Code or your own agent as a pull request reviewer triggered by webhook, with scoped repository access, a budget and an audit trail of every comment.

A pull request reviewer runs often, reads a lot of untrusted text and holds credentials to your code. That combination is why it deserves more structure than a script with a personal access token.

How is it set up?

A fleet triggered by a webhook on pull request events. The connector permissions are narrow: read the repository, post review comments. Posting a comment is reversible, so it runs within policy. There is no merge permission to approve, because it was never granted.

What protects the repository?

  • Narrow, short-lived credentials. The agent never holds your token. The gateway attaches a scoped credential for the run.
  • A sandbox per agent. Code from the pull request runs in the reviewer's sandbox, not on a shared box.
  • Effect classes. If you later allow it to push fixes, that can be gated by policy or by a person.
  • A per-run cap. A huge diff cannot turn into a huge bill.

What is recorded?

Every comment, tool call and model call goes into the hash-chained audit trail, and each run ends with a receipt. If a review comment was wrong, you can see exactly what the agent read before it wrote it.

Updated

Questions

Can the reviewer approve or merge pull requests?
Only if your policy allows it. A typical setup lets it read code and post review comments, and gives it no merge permission at all.
How is the reviewer triggered?
By a webhook when a pull request opens or updates, or from Slack, the API or a chat in ChatGPT or Claude.

A new home for autonomous work.

Big ambitions. Steady hands.

Bring your first agent aboard. Heighliner is in early access, and we’re building with our first crews.