Even with Fable I'm still seeing wrong but plausible answers, which are the worst kind imo.
AGENTS.md didn't quite give me the right boost either, so here's my flow:
1. Asking 2 new sessions to review what I built in my other session along with guides/standards* 2. Having a third session judge the first two. It dedupes, and does a good job of only surfacing the important stuff 3. Ask it to make edits, etc.
Some missing parts that I've been finding improve review are: - current/past session context - indexed codebase - PRs/git history - research/guides/3rd party context*
I had been running this on my own for a long time, and just started to turn it into a product. It's free right now, would love any feedback (roast me). Looking forward to catching some bugs for you guys.
Thanks for reading!
* OWASP, Google Code Review, etc