docs: enhance why coderabbit page #182
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request focuses on a comprehensive update to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Deploying coderabbit-docs with
|
| Latest commit: |
4bb4553
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://e942a6d9.coderabbit-docs.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://docs-enhance-why-coderabbit.coderabbit-docs.pages.dev |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md (2)
14-48: Fix ordered list numbering styleThe ordered list numbers should follow a consistent 1/1/1 style according to markdown best practices.
Apply this diff to fix the list numbering:
-1. **To build the best code review experience in the tech** +1. **To build the best code review experience in the tech** -2. **In an ever-evolving tech space, we believe AI-powered code review is the future** +1. **In an ever-evolving tech space, we believe AI-powered code review is the future** -3. **An insight that modern code review can be reimagined** +1. **An insight that modern code review can be reimagined** -4. **The conviction that our AI can provide a better Developer Experience (DevX)** +1. **The conviction that our AI can provide a better Developer Experience (DevX)**🧰 Tools
🪛 Markdownlint (0.37.0)
20-20: Expected: 1; Actual: 2; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix(MD029, ol-prefix)
24-24: Expected: 1; Actual: 3; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix(MD029, ol-prefix)
34-34: Expected: 1; Actual: 4; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix(MD029, ol-prefix)
352-352: Fix grammatical error in repository selection stepThere's a subject-verb agreement issue in the instruction.
Apply this diff to fix the grammar:
-2. Select and add a repositories in CodeRabbit dashboard +2. Select and add a repository in CodeRabbit dashboard🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~352-~352: It looks like ‘repositories’ doesn’t match ‘a’. Did you mean “a repository” or just “repositories”?
Context: ...atforms/azure-devops) 2. Select and add a repositories in CodeRabbit dashboard 3. That's it. Y...(A_NNS_IN)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md
[grammar] ~352-~352: It looks like ‘repositories’ doesn’t match ‘a’. Did you mean “a repository” or just “repositories”?
Context: ...atforms/azure-devops) 2. Select and add a repositories in CodeRabbit dashboard 3. That's it. Y...
(A_NNS_IN)
🪛 Markdownlint (0.37.0)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md
20-20: Expected: 1; Actual: 2; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix
(MD029, ol-prefix)
24-24: Expected: 1; Actual: 3; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix
(MD029, ol-prefix)
34-34: Expected: 1; Actual: 4; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix
(MD029, ol-prefix)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md (2)
Line range hint 1-11: LGTM! Well-structured document header
The frontmatter and imports are properly configured, following documentation best practices.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~352-~352: It looks like ‘repositories’ doesn’t match ‘a’. Did you mean “a repository” or just “repositories”?
Context: ...atforms/azure-devops) 2. Select and add a repositories in CodeRabbit dashboard 3. That's it. Y...
(A_NNS_IN)
🪛 Markdownlint (0.37.0)
20-20: Expected: 1; Actual: 2; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix
(MD029, ol-prefix)
24-24: Expected: 1; Actual: 3; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix
(MD029, ol-prefix)
34-34: Expected: 1; Actual: 4; Style: 1/1/1
Ordered list item prefix
(MD029, ol-prefix)
424-435: LGTM! Strong conclusion with clear next steps
The conclusion effectively summarizes the benefits and provides clear call-to-action elements, making it easy for users to get started.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md (2)
16-17: Consider removing empty line after single bullet pointFor better markdown consistency, remove the empty line after the single bullet point, as it's not needed here and differs from other bullet point formatting in the document.
- **To build the best code review experience in the tech** - + **To build the best code review experience in the tech**
114-134: Consider adding type annotations in TypeScript exampleFor better documentation and type safety demonstration, consider adding type annotations to the TypeScript example.
- tools.map(async (tool) => { + tools.map(async (tool: ToolInput) => {You might want to add an interface definition above the example:
interface ToolInput { name: string; description: string; headline: string; features: string[]; categories?: string[]; tags?: string[]; stars?: number; forks?: number; websiteUrl: string; githubUrl?: string; documentation?: string; }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md
[grammar] ~352-~352: It looks like ‘repositories’ doesn’t match ‘a’. Did you mean “a repository” or just “repositories”?
Context: ...atforms/azure-devops) 2. Select and add a repositories in CodeRabbit dashboard 3. That's it. Y...
(A_NNS_IN)
|
|
||
| You can read more about our custom [code review instructions](/guides/review-instructions) or how we verify issues using [knowledge bases](/integrations/knowledge-base) like Linear and Jira. | ||
| - Reduce review time by up to 90% |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Based on the comprehensive search through the documentation, I can now generate the final response:
The 90% review time reduction claim needs supporting evidence
The claimed statistic of "Reduce review time by up to 90%" appears to be unsupported by any concrete data, case studies, or benchmarks in the documentation. While the documentation discusses various performance improvements and efficiency gains, there are no specific metrics or studies cited to validate this precise percentage claim.
- Consider either:
- Removing the specific percentage claim and using more general terms like "significantly reduces review time"
- Adding references to actual case studies or data that support this specific metric
- Providing a range based on observed customer data if available
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the review time reduction statistic
The claim "Reduce review time by up to 90%" is quite significant. Consider adding a reference or case study to support this statistic for better credibility.
Let me search for more context about performance claims or metrics in the documentation.
Let me search specifically for any case studies, benchmarks, or metrics data that might support the 90% claim.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any supporting data or case studies in the docs
rg -i "90%|review time|time reduction" docs/
Length of output: 296
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any metrics, statistics, or performance claims
rg -i "improve|increase|reduce|faster|efficiency|productivity|performance" docs/ -A 2
Length of output: 10910
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for case studies, benchmarks, or specific metrics
rg -i "case study|benchmark|metrics|measure|statistics|data|study|research" docs/ -A 2
Length of output: 10005
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md (2)
16-17: Add missing punctuation in the headingConsider adding a period at the end of the heading for consistency with the writing style.
- **To build the best code review experience in the tech** + **To build the best code review experience in the tech.**
421-421: Fix grammatical error in support messageAdd the missing article "the" before "team".
- Need help? read [quickstart](/getting-started/quickstart) or ask a question in [Discord community](https://discord.gg/coderabbit), and team is here to help. + Need help? read [quickstart](/getting-started/quickstart) or ask a question in [Discord community](https://discord.gg/coderabbit), and the team is here to help.🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[uncategorized] ~421-~421: Possible missing article found.
Context: ...ty](https://discord.gg/coderabbit), and team is here to help. ::: ## See the Differ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_THE)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md
[uncategorized] ~421-~421: Possible missing article found.
Context: ...ty](https://discord.gg/coderabbit), and team is here to help. ::: ## See the Differ...
(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_THE)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
docs/overview/why-coderabbit.md (2)
428-428: The 90% review time reduction claim needs supporting evidence
The claimed statistic of "Reduce review time by up to 90%" appears to be unsupported by any concrete data, case studies, or benchmarks in the documentation.
Consider either:
- Removing the specific percentage claim and using more general terms like "significantly reduces review time"
- Adding references to actual case studies or data that support this specific metric
- Providing a range based on observed customer data if available
Line range hint 1-435: Overall documentation improvements look great!
The enhanced structure, detailed feature explanations, and improved visual presentation effectively communicate CodeRabbit's value proposition. The content is well-organized and maintains a professional tone throughout.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[uncategorized] ~421-~421: Possible missing article found.
Context: ...ty](https://discord.gg/coderabbit), and team is here to help. ::: ## See the Differ...
(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_THE)
No description provided.