DeputyDev -- AI Powered Developer Assistant: Breaking the Code Review Logjam through Contextual AI to Boost Developer Productivity
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.09676v1
- Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 10:09:45 GMT
- Title: DeputyDev -- AI Powered Developer Assistant: Breaking the Code Review Logjam through Contextual AI to Boost Developer Productivity
- Authors: Vishal Khare, Vijay Saini, Deepak Sharma, Anand Kumar, Ankit Rana, Anshul Yadav,
- Abstract summary: This study investigates the implementation and efficacy of DeputyDev.<n>DeputyDev is an AI-powered code review assistant developed to address inefficiencies in the software development process.
- Score: 38.585498338645856
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: This study investigates the implementation and efficacy of DeputyDev, an AI-powered code review assistant developed to address inefficiencies in the software development process. The process of code review is highly inefficient for several reasons, such as it being a time-consuming process, inconsistent feedback, and review quality not being at par most of the time. Using our telemetry data, we observed that at TATA 1mg, pull request (PR) processing exhibits significant inefficiencies, with average pick-up and review times of 73 and 82 hours, respectively, resulting in a 6.2 day closure cycle. The review cycle was marked by prolonged iterative communication between the reviewing and submitting parties. Research from the University of California, Irvine indicates that interruptions can lead to an average of 23 minutes of lost focus, critically affecting code quality and timely delivery. To address these challenges, we developed DeputyDev's PR review capabilities by providing automated, contextual code reviews. We conducted a rigorous double-controlled A/B experiment involving over 200 engineers to evaluate DeputyDev's impact on review times. The results demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in both average per PR (23.09%) and average per-line-of-code (40.13%) review durations. After implementing safeguards to exclude outliers, DeputyDev has been effectively rolled out across the entire organisation. Additionally, it has been made available to external companies as a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution, currently supporting the daily work of numerous engineering professionals. This study explores the implementation and effectiveness of AI-assisted code reviews in improving development workflow timelines and code.
Related papers
- What to Cut? Predicting Unnecessary Methods in Agentic Code Generation [0.0]
We propose a prediction model that identifies functions likely to be deleted during PR review.<n>Our results show that functions deleted for different reasons exhibit distinct characteristics.<n>These findings suggest that predictive approaches can help reviewers prioritize their efforts on essential code.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-19T05:29:32Z) - CoCoNUTS: Concentrating on Content while Neglecting Uninformative Textual Styles for AI-Generated Peer Review Detection [60.52240468810558]
We introduce CoCoNUTS, a content-oriented benchmark built upon a fine-grained dataset of AI-generated peer reviews.<n>We also develop CoCoDet, an AI review detector via a multi-task learning framework, to achieve more accurate and robust detection of AI involvement in review content.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-28T06:03:11Z) - Code Review as Decision-Making -- Building a Cognitive Model from the Questions Asked During Code Review [2.8299846354183953]
We build a cognitive model of code review bottom up through thematic, statistical, temporal, and sequential analysis of the transcribed material.<n>The model shows how developers move through two phases during the code review; first an orientation phase to establish context and rationale, then an analytical phase to understand, assess, and plan the rest of the review.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-13T14:04:16Z) - Code with Me or for Me? How Increasing AI Automation Transforms Developer Workflows [66.1850490474361]
We conduct the first academic study to explore developer interactions with coding agents.<n>We evaluate two leading copilot and agentic coding assistants, GitHub Copilot and OpenHands.<n>Our results show agents have the potential to assist developers in ways that surpass copilots.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-10T20:12:54Z) - LazyReview A Dataset for Uncovering Lazy Thinking in NLP Peer Reviews [74.87393214734114]
This work introduces LazyReview, a dataset of peer-review sentences annotated with fine-grained lazy thinking categories.<n>Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle to detect these instances in a zero-shot setting.<n> instruction-based fine-tuning on our dataset significantly boosts performance by 10-20 performance points.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-15T10:07:33Z) - On the Role of Feedback in Test-Time Scaling of Agentic AI Workflows [71.92083784393418]
Agentic AI (systems that autonomously plan and act) are becoming widespread, yet their task success rate on complex tasks remains low.<n>Inference-time alignment relies on three components: sampling, evaluation, and feedback.<n>We introduce Iterative Agent Decoding (IAD), a procedure that repeatedly inserts feedback extracted from different forms of critiques.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-02T17:40:47Z) - Automated Code Review In Practice [1.6271516689052665]
Several AI-assisted tools, such as Qodo, GitHub Copilot, and Coderabbit, provide automated reviews using large language models (LLMs)<n>This study examines the impact of LLM-based automated code review tools in an industrial setting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-24T16:24:45Z) - Understanding Code Understandability Improvements in Code Reviews [79.16476505761582]
We analyzed 2,401 code review comments from Java open-source projects on GitHub.
83.9% of suggestions for improvement were accepted and integrated, with fewer than 1% later reverted.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-29T12:21:23Z) - Predicting Expert Evaluations in Software Code Reviews [8.012861163935904]
This paper presents an algorithmic model that automates aspects of code review typically avoided due to their complexity or subjectivity.
Instead of replacing manual reviews, our model adds insights that help reviewers focus on more impactful tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-23T16:01:52Z) - How far are AI-powered programming assistants from meeting developers' needs? [17.77734978425295]
In-IDE AI coding assistant tools (ACATs) like GitHub Copilot have significantly impacted developers' coding habits.
We simulate real development scenarios and recruit 27 computer science students to investigate their behavior with three popular ACATs.
We find that ACATs generally enhance task completion rates, reduce time, improve code quality, and increase self-perceived productivity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-18T08:51:14Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.