but an other maybe bigger cost might be your time reviewing those 'bandaid fixes.' if you're merging only 30%, that means you're spending 70% of your review bandwidth on PRs that shouldn't exist right?
we deduplicate before the claude analysis with the alert context and after based on the rca so we ensure we have no noise in the PRs you have to review
why don't you trust an agent to triage alerts+issues?
The exception is when a fix is a) trivial or b) affecting a real user and therefore needs to be fixed quickly, in which case the current workflow is useful. But yeah, the real step-change was having Claude hitting the Sentry APIs directly and getting the info it needs, whether async or not.
I'd also imagine that people's experiences with this vary a lot depending on the size and stage of the company - our focus is developing new features quickly rather than maintaining a 100% available critical production service, for example.
Claude will typically resolve these in a surface level way when in practice they often require deeper changes (to prompts, routing to different model, more general cleaning code, etc) and it’s hard/impossible to have Claude do these without some input.
Other noise arises from Claude thinking related issues are unrelated and so solving them separately, and also just intermittent infrastructure type issues that are clearly transient being “solved” with some weird code change.