Code reviews should be converging

> Utilize Automated Tools for Code Style [...]: Ideally, comments related to code convention or commit message convention should not be necessary. These aspects should be checked and corrected via automated tools and made a prerequisite before creating a PR. Let these tools handle consistency, freeing up valuable human review time for more substantive concerns.

This is hugely important. Decide on linters, static analysis, refactoring tools, etc., and after a deliberate selection process, never argue about them or their results again. Just make the tools happy and move on.

I've also seen high functioning teams choose and agree on an API design philosophy. Arguing about design with no boundaries the discussion feels like arguing about the entire open ocean. Limiting the universe to a small set of design inspiration (kind of like a standard set of UI components) prevents lots of discussion that doesn't help the team or the business.

For as many things as possible, we should be able to point to something outside of the team, and chosen by the team, and say "this is how we've chosen to do it and we're not going to fight about it."