Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
What is this?
Less
More
AI Automation Mastery

783 members • Free

AI Agent Builders

8.3k members • Free

The RoboNuggets Network (free)

76.4k members • Free

Wifi Life

4.7k members • Free

Autoploy Academy

802 members • $9/month

AI Systems for Human Content

10.7k members • Free

AI Bits and Pieces

877 members • Free

AI Automation Base

1.2k members • Free

AI Automation First Client

2k members • Free

2 contributions to AI Developer Accelerator
I built an AI coding agent that understands the repository, not just the diff
Most AI coding tools look at the file you changed. I wanted to know what that change could affect across the repository. So I’ve been building GitHub Autopilot — an open-source AI engineering agent that can review PRs, fix bugs, scan for security issues, manage GitHub workflows, and now build an AST-based dependency graph of the codebase. The graph can identify: - Module dependencies - Fan-in / fan-out - Import cycles - Orphan modules - Dependency hotspots - Runtime vs top-level imports It actually found a 5-module import cycle in my own repository. I fixed it and added CI checks to catch regressions. The project is open source and self-hostable, with local LLM support for privacy-sensitive code. GitHub: https://github.com/Shweta-Mishra-ai/github-autopilot What repository-level context do you think AI coding agents are still missing?
0
0
Recently I built a small experiment called AI Repo Manager.
It’s a GitHub App that listens to webhook events and helps automate common repository tasks like PR review, issue triage, and repo health checks. I tried to focus more on architecture reliability — guardrails, async webhook handling, and validation of AI responses. Would love feedback from other developers on the approach. Repo: https://github.com/Shweta-Mishra-ai/github-autopilot
0 likes • Mar 7
@Winner Le Paradoxe Konou Thanks for the thoughtful read, I really appreciate you going through the architecture. In the current setup most retries are still handled at the infrastructure layer (GitHub API retry + webhook idempotency), and the guardrails enforce deterministic checks before any automated action. I haven’t run deeply into the agent self-replanning loop scenario yet during these experiments, but you’re right — once agents start re-invoking tools under slightly different contexts, simple retry control won’t be enough. That likely needs additional state tracking or loop detection at the orchestration level. Definitely something I’m interested in exploring as the system evolves.
0 likes • Mar 7
@Winner Le Paradoxe Konou That’s a great point. Right now the system treats each webhook event independently, so the guardrails mainly prevent unsafe actions rather than repeated agent-driven ones. If the agent starts re-analyzing the same PR or issue and triggering additional actions, we’d probably need some form of state tracking or action history to avoid loops or redundant updates. Definitely an interesting direction as these systems become more autonomous.
1-2 of 2
Shweta Mishra
1
2 points to level up
@shweta-mishra-9281
Data analyst and data scientist ai ml

Active 9h ago
Joined Dec 14, 2025
Powered by