Scaling Code Quality: Building uReview, Uber’s Multi-Agent Code Review Engine
Will Bond, Ameya Ketkar
- When
- Tuesday, June 3012:05 PM – 12:25 PM · 20 min
- Where
- Leadership 1San Francisco, CA · imported from ai.engineer's public schedule feed
About this session
At Uber scale, human-only code reviews create massive bottlenecks, while generic AI tools overwhelm developers with noisy, hallucinated spam. This session explores the architecture behind uReview, Uber’s multi-agent AI code review engine designed strictly for high-precision feedback. Attendees will learn how we moved beyond monolithic prompts to build a modular pipeline featuring deep contextual ingestion, specialized domain agents, and a Generator-Verifier grader system. By enforcing strict confidence scoring and semantic deduplication, uReview filters out AI noise, shifting the focus from comment quantity to high-signal actionability and significantly reducing Pull Request cycle times. Talk Outline I. The Code Review Crisis at Uber Scale (0–3 mins) Establish the critical tension between engineering velocity and code quality, highlighting why standard AI implementations fail in massive monorepo environments. 1. The Monorepo Bottleneck: At Uber, thousands of engineers commit code daily. Relying solely on human reviewers creates a massive operational bottleneck, leading to reviewer fatigue, extended Pull Request cycle times, and inevitable missed vulnerabilities. 2. The Developer Spam Problem: Generic LLM integrations fail because they prioritize comment quantity over actionable quality. If an AI posts ten hallucinated suggestions on a diff, developers will simply mute the tool. AI must reduce cognitive load, not add to it. 3. The Signal-to-Noise Mandate: Defining the North Star for uReview. The goal is not to replace human reviewers, but to build an AI system that respects developer time by delivering high-precision, strictly verified code feedback. II. The uReview Architecture: A Modular Agentic Pipeline (3–10 mins) Detail the transition from a monolithic prompt approach to uReview’s sophisticated, multi-stage agentic workflow designed for enterprise codebases. 1. Deep Contextual Ingestion: A standard git diff is not enough. We discuss how uReview fetches extended context, integrating with our build systems to analyze surrounding functions, upstream dependencies, and class hierarchies before generating a single token. 2. Specialized Domain Assistants: Instead of a generalist model, uReview deploys independent AI agents. We route code to narrow, specialized agents—such as a Go Concurrency Analyzer, a Java Memory Leak Detector, or a Security Vulnerability Scanner—to ensure precise, domain-specific insights. 3. Hybrid Intelligence: Probabilistic LLMs cannot operate in a vacuum. We detail how uReview integrates deterministic tools, like Bazel dependency graphs and static linters, to ground AI suggestions in objective codebase realities. III. Engineering the Trust Layer (10–17 mins) Dive into the verification phase. This is the core engineering that filters out AI noise and ensures uReview maintains developer trust. 1. The Generator-Verifier Pattern: Implementing a Grader Model architecture. A primary agent generates code suggestions, but a secondary, high-reasoning model audits those suggestions against strict coding guidelines to catch hallucinations before they reach the PR. 2. Confidence Scoring and Suppression: We assign a numerical confidence score to every generated comment. If a comment falls below our calibrated threshold, uReview silently drops it. We explore the engineering behind suppressing low-confidence outputs to prevent tooling spam. 3. Semantic Deduplication: Technical strategies for merging overlapping warnings. If a deterministic static analysis tool and an LLM agent flag the same null pointer exception, uReview merges them into a single, concise developer instruction. IV. Operationalizing uReview at Scale (17–20 mins) Conclude by discussing the long-term governance, feedback loops, and measurable impact of running an AI review engine in production. 1. The Telemetry Feedback Loop: We embedded Useful and Not Useful rating buttons directly into the developer UI on every uReview comment. We discuss how this telemetry flows back into a curated data lake, driving continuous Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback and prompt refinement. 2. Shifting Success Metrics: Why organizations must abandon vanity metrics like total comments posted. We measure uReview’s success through Actionability Rate (the percentage of AI comments accepted as commits) and the reduction in Mean Time To Merge.
Speakers (2)
Staff Software Engineer, Uber
Staff Software Engineer at Uber, working on AI developer experience and code review
Software Engineer, Uber Technology Inc.
Software engineer at Uber's Programming Systems Group, his research focus is program analysis, language migrations, large-scale source code mining and accelerating code reviews.
More in AI-Native Enterprises
- Building the engine while flying the plane — launching the Figma MCP serverTuesday, June 30 · 11:10 AM – 11:30 AM · Leadership 1
- Agentic SDLC at Uber: Building Blocks for Uber's Software FactoryTuesday, June 30 · 11:40 AM – 12:00 PM · Leadership 1
- AI Evals Platform for Cross-Functional Teams at ScaleTuesday, June 30 · 1:55 PM – 2:15 PM · Leadership 1
- Productionizing LLM Gateways: Architecture, Tradeoffs, and Hard Lessons from the TrenchesTuesday, June 30 · 2:25 PM – 2:45 PM · Leadership 1
- From AI-Assisted to AI-Native: Building a Frontier Development TeamTuesday, June 30 · 2:50 PM – 3:10 PM · Leadership 1
For developers: this programme is open data — JSON, iCal, schedule XML and an MCP endpoint.Show endpointsHide
- JSONEvery published session and speaker, in one request./aie-worldsfair-2026-import/feed.json
- iCalSubscribe in Google, Apple or Outlook Calendar./aie-worldsfair-2026-import/feed.ics
- Schedule XMLfrab / pentabarf — the format conference apps import./aie-worldsfair-2026-import/feed.xml
- MCP + RESTPoint Claude at the programme. OpenAPI 3.1 included./agents
No key, no signup, CORS open. Everything here is generated from the same data the organisers edit.