shipwithmuse

Entries matching “code-review”

6 builds · page 1 of 1

U

StockSpecialist1707

u/StockSpecialist1707

Setup. We run Qwen3.8-Flash-Next NVFP4 as our main agentic model (SGLang, RTX PRO 6000). Before its output reaches a human or gets merged, a second local model acts as judge: reviews the diff, flags real bugs only. Hosted on a 5090 32GB, so we're limited to ~30B NVFP4/GGUF class models. The metric that matters is NOT detection rate — it's false alarms on correct code. A judge that cries wolf gets ignored within a week, exactly like a flaky CI. We built our own battery: 20 injected bugs + 20 clean-but-suspicious snippets (intentional swallowed exceptions, deliberate mutability, weird-but-correct concurrency, short hashes, float patterns that look wrong). Ground-truth labeled, and a stronger model (GLM-5.2 API) arbitrates the judge's prose so scoring isn't vibes. Two passes minimum — single runs lie. Results (40 cases, temp 0, same baremo for everyone): Qwen3.8-27B NVFP4 (no-thinking) • Bugs found: 17/20 • False alarms: 3/20 • Verdict: only pass Nemotron Lightning 30B • Bugs found: 17/20 • False alarms: 0→9 across runs • Verdict: non-reproducible as judge Muse-Glimmer 30B GGUF • Bugs found: 19/20 • False alarms: 12/20 • Verdict: hypercritical Granite 4.1 30B (no-thinki

Reddit post · Benchmarks & research

Local code-review judges: Glimmer is hypercritical

@rtravellin

@rtravellin

A Claude Code plugin that adds /muse:review, /muse:critique, /muse:delegate and /muse:transfer commands, running Muse Code reviews and delegated tasks as background jobs.

Skill · Coding & dev tools

Muse Code plugin for Claude Code

@GGulati

@GGulati

A personal software factory built on Muse agents and Erlang/OTP principles: a markdown backlog goes in, and each run takes one item through planning, dual review, TDD, code review and verification.

GitHub · Agents & automation· ★ 1

MuseFactory

U

Graemer71

u/Graemer71

OK, for context, I have Claude Code desktop app driving the CLI and orchestrating the code and verification tasks to try to save tokens. So Claude runs things, a Deepseek 4.1 Flash (cloud) session does the planning, Qwen 3.8 27b Q8 does the boiler plate coding and Muse Glimmer sanity checks the code and pushes any issues back to Qwen. If there are issues Qwen and Glimmer can't agree on, Deepseek validates. If Deepseek can't sort it out, it goes back to Claude. This had been working fine, but then in the last few days token use spiked, tasks that used to take 10 minutes were taking an hour or more and Qwen started going into more and more reasoning loops. It seems that since I last checked (on 12th September) the CLI changed. I used to strip unnecessary tool calls from the prompt using --disallowedTools and enabledPlugins: false. It would seem that these no longer work. In the end I got Claude to build a request-dumping diagnostic server, that actually measured the payload bytes, and confirmed --tools (an allowlist) is the flag that works now: 55→7 tools, 161KB→24KB, byte-verified. It also caught something specific to my workflow running the wrapper from inside an already-active

U

sebseo

u/sebseo

This week we spent about $95 trying to beat our own lineup of reviewing models. One of the candidates was Muse Spark 1.2, and it turned out to be the most interesting model in the whole test. The good, measured: • Among the best we tested at finding real problems. Scored against bugs we already knew were there, it matched our existing lineup, and it caught one real bug our lineup had missed. • Fastest model in our table. Typical answer in 18 seconds, writing at over 220 tokens a second. The speed table from our test (same job, same codebases, 33 runs per model): Model Typical time Answer length (tokens) Writing speed (tok/s) Time follows answer length Time follows question length Muse Spark 1.2 18 s 4,205 222 0.79 barely (0.08) Gemini 3.1 Pro 19 s 2,621 133 0.99 no (0.0) Gemini 3.8 Flash 22 s 1,996 89 0.91 some (0.65) GPT 5.4 29 s 3,058 105 0.95 no (below 0) Grok 4.6 38 s 2,498 61 0.61 no (below 0) Grok 4.7 44 s * 3,176 75 0.98 a little (0.30) Claude Sonnet 5 50 s * 4,471 91 0.59 barely (0.07) * Runs that finished in time only, so the real typical time is higher. The last two columns are correlations: 1 means time rises in step with that length, 0 means no lin

Reddit post · Benchmarks & research

Muse Spark 1.2 as a code reviewer vs 6 models

Your product

Sponsored

Put your logo, a line of copy and an image right here, between the builds Muse developers come to read. Same size as a post.

$100/week

Put your product here

Shown every 12 builds · on every catalog page

@danny-hines

@danny-hines

Call Muse Code from Codex or ChatGPT desktop via MCP tools and skills for independent code review, approach comparison or delegated implementation, using a Muse Code subscription or API key.

Skill · Coding & dev tools

Muse Code Bridge for Codex