Human judgment stays. Context arrives instantly.
Manual review means opening a PR, reading the diff, maybe checking who wrote it, and deciding whether to approve. Axiomo gives you that context instantly - contributor history, risk signals, sensitive paths touched, policy compliance - so you can make better decisions faster without replacing your judgment.
Who is this contributor? What's their history? You'd need to check their profile, search past PRs, review their previous commits. Most reviewers don't have time.
A 50-file PR lands in your queue. You scroll through, maybe spot-check a few files, and approve. Too much to review properly, not enough time.
One reviewer is strict about tests. Another lets anything through. Without enforcement, governance is just documentation nobody reads.
Copilot, Cursor, and AI agents produce more code faster than humans can inspect. The review bottleneck is getting worse, not better.
| Capability | Manual Review | With Axiomo |
|---|---|---|
| Know contributor's track record | Manual lookup | Instant |
| Identify high-risk changes | Experience/intuition | Explicit signals |
| Find sensitive paths touched | Scroll through diff | Highlighted |
| Know where to focus | Read everything | Focus files ranked |
| Enforce review policies | Documentation | Automated checks |
| Audit trail | Git history | Scan history + export |
| Human judgment | Yes | Yes |
Axiomo doesn't replace manual review - it makes it effective. You still read the code. You still make the call. But instead of guessing who this contributor is, what's at risk, and where to focus, you know. The information that would take 10 minutes to gather is there in seconds.
Analyze any public PR in seconds