feat updated pr review output format #446
Conversation
…ls-should-be-part-of-patch-or-not
Code Review❗ Attention Required: This PR has potential issues. 🚨 ConfigurationChanges made to sensitive filePotential Solution: NA
Useful Commands
|
![kaizen-bot[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/480502?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| @@ -11,7 +11,17 @@ | |||
| "input_cost_per_token": 0.000000015, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Comment: Changes made to sensitive file
Solution: NA
Reason For Comment: Changes were made to config.json, which needs review
Code Review❗ Attention Required: This PR has potential issues. 🚨 Configuration ManagementThe use of 'os.environ' for API keys is correct, but ensure that environment variables are loaded correctly.Potential Solution: Add a check to ensure that the required environment variables are present.
ConfigurationChanges made to sensitive filePotential Solution: NA
Useful Commands
|
Add Model Selection and Minor Code Review Improvements
Overview
This pull request introduces the ability to select different models for code review and refines the code review format for better clarity.
Changes
process_prfunction, allowing users to specify the desired model for code review.config.jsonfile to include model information for the "best" model.code_review_formatter.pyto improve the presentation of review results, separating critical issues from refinement suggestions and providing a more concise format for minor notes.code_review_formatter.pyto improve the organization and readability of the code review output.Original Description