The outcome

Find actionable defects without treating generated review comments as authoritative or exposing unnecessary code and secrets.

Step by step

A workflow you can repeat.

  1. 01

    Define the diff, threat model, quality bar, sensitive paths, and checks needed for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability.

  2. 02

    Inspect thread visibility and data policy, remove secrets from the workspace context, and run the review from a clean trusted checkout.

  3. 03

    Use Amp review and narrow repository checks, asking each finding to cite exact code, impact, reproduction evidence, and a minimal correction.

  4. 04

    Reproduce high-severity findings with trusted tests or manual analysis, reject unsupported claims, and ensure suggested fixes do not widen permissions or scope.

  5. 05

    Record accepted and dismissed findings, rerun the project checks after changes, and obtain the required human approval before merge or deployment.

Working standard

What good use looks like.

  • Verify every high-impact finding.
  • Keep thread sharing intentional.
  • Never paste credentials into review context.

Official references

Check the current product documentation.