> Mostly I won't even look at a review until CI passes. I don't want to look at your code if some static analysis in CI would find issues.

> but we have a lot of static analysis that we run as part of CI, some of it standard some of it custom for people who violate our code style in some way.

Yeah, but why would issues that static analysis find stop you from doing the review? I never review things that automated tools can find, I care more about reviewing things only a human could review. "Does this make sense here?", "Is this decoupled enough/too much?", "Does this work well with the overall architecture?", "Does this test test the right thing?" and so on.

I wouldn't spend my review time on spellchecking people or pointing out issues like that, that's for the tooling to do. And even if the CI fails because of some analysis, PR author fixes it, every review comment should still be applicable, otherwise you're just doing robot work.