Generated code changes the shape of review, not the need for it. The highest-value questions stay familiar: what contract moved, who depends on it, and what breaks when the happy path is absent?
What changes in practice
Review the decisions and the interfaces, not every repeated line of output.
$ codex exec "review the changed boundary"
→ reading the scoped files
✓ focused checks passedReview the decisions and the interfaces, not every repeated line of output.
Our sample loop begins with a targeted diff summary, then reads the altered boundary files in full. Tests are evidence, but they are not the whole argument when the behavior has an interface or editorial consequence.
The final pass is practical: open the route, try the empty state, and make sure the language says what the product actually does. That is where a speed gain becomes trustworthy.
Keep this close
- Read ownership boundaries first
- Exercise a failure or empty state
- Leave a concise decision record