docs: polish agent workflow guides - #656
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
I'm starting a first review of this pull request. You can view the conversation on Warp. I completed the review and no human review was requested for this pull request. Comment Powered by Oz |
![warp-for-oss[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/3450139?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overview
This PR polishes two agent workflow guides, mostly tightening wording, formatting list items, and adding a more concrete parallel-workstreams example. The changed internal links resolve locally, and I found no security concerns or spec drift; no approved spec context was provided.
Concerns
src/content/docs/guides/agent-workflows/how-to-review-ai-generated-code.mdxnow has a two-sentence frontmatter description, but docs frontmatter descriptions must be one sentence.- A couple of changed lines still use non-preferred docs phrasing or terminology.
Verdict
Found: 0 critical, 1 important, 2 suggestions
Request changes
Comment /warp-agent-review on this pull request to retrigger a review (up to 3 times on the same pull request).
Powered by Oz
| Review AI-generated code in Warp with visual diffs and inline comments. | ||
| Use this workflow with Claude Code, Codex, or any CLI agent. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Review AI-generated code in Warp with visual diffs and inline comments. | |
| Use this workflow with Claude Code, Codex, or any CLI agent. | |
| Review AI-generated code in Warp with visual diffs and inline comments for Claude Code, Codex, or any CLI agent. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's actually okay to have up to 2 sentences in the frontmatter description. Let's not change it. I like the two sentence structure.
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| Coding agents can produce hundreds of lines of code in seconds, but shipping that code without review is risky. This guide provides a practical workflow for reviewing agent-generated code in Warp, catching common issues, and giving structured feedback that the agent can act on. Plan on about 10 minutes to complete. | ||
| Coding agents can produce hundreds of lines of code in seconds, but shipping that code without review is risky. This guide walks through a practical workflow for reviewing agent-generated code in Warp. You'll catch common issues and give the agent structured feedback it can act on. Plan on about 10 minutes to complete. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 [SUGGESTION] Avoid opening-page meta phrasing like “This guide walks through”; state the workflow directly.
| Coding agents can produce hundreds of lines of code in seconds, but shipping that code without review is risky. This guide walks through a practical workflow for reviewing agent-generated code in Warp. You'll catch common issues and give the agent structured feedback it can act on. Plan on about 10 minutes to complete. | |
| Coding agents can produce hundreds of lines of code in seconds, but shipping that code without review is risky. In Warp, use visual diffs and inline comments to catch common issues and give the agent structured feedback it can act on. Plan on about 10 minutes to complete. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree but let's make it, "In Warp, you can use visual diffs and inline comments to..."
|
|
||
| --- | ||
| Most PM work breaks down into three activities: gathering information, synthesizing it, and communicating the result. These five workflows use Warp's agents and MCP integrations to automate the gathering and speed up the synthesis, so you spend less time switching between tools and more time making decisions. Each workflow takes 5–10 minutes to set up. | ||
| Most PM work involves gathering information, synthesizing it, and communicating the result. These five workflows use Warp agents and MCP servers to automate research and speed up synthesis. You'll spend less time switching between tools and more time making decisions. Each workflow takes 5–10 minutes to set up. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 [SUGGESTION] Use “agents in Warp” instead of the non-standard “Warp agents” phrasing.
| Most PM work involves gathering information, synthesizing it, and communicating the result. These five workflows use Warp agents and MCP servers to automate research and speed up synthesis. You'll spend less time switching between tools and more time making decisions. Each workflow takes 5–10 minutes to set up. | |
| Most PM work involves gathering information, synthesizing it, and communicating the result. These five workflows use agents in Warp and MCP servers to gather context and speed up synthesis. You'll spend less time switching between tools and more time making decisions. Each workflow takes 5–10 minutes to set up. |
| ## 1. Give the agent a task | ||
|
|
||
| Whether you're using Claude Code, Codex, or Warp's built-in agent, start by giving your agent a task. For example: | ||
| Whether you're using Claude Code, Codex, or the Warp Agent, start by giving the agent a task. For example, enter the following. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Whether you're using Claude Code, Codex, or the Warp Agent, start by giving the agent a task. For example, enter the following. | |
| Whether you're using Claude Code, Codex, or the Warp Agent, start by giving the agent a task. For example, try the following prompt: |
| ## 2. Open the Code Review panel | ||
|
|
||
| Once the agent has finished the task, open Warp's [Code Review panel](/code/code-review/) to see every file that changed. You can open it in several ways: | ||
| Once the agent has finished the task, open Warp's [Code Review panel](/code/code-review/) to see every file that changed. Open the panel in any of the following ways. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Once the agent has finished the task, open Warp's [Code Review panel](/code/code-review/) to see every file that changed. Open the panel in any of the following ways. | |
| Once the agent has finished the task, open Warp's [Code Review panel](/code/code-review/) to see every file that changed. Open the panel in any of the following ways: |
Colons are okay when introducing something like a list or a codeblock. We want to be very discerning with colons in prose. This type of colon is okay.
| Click the "Add comment" button on any line or block of code and add a comment describing what needs to change. Warp anchors each comment to the exact file and line, so any agent understands precisely what to fix. | ||
| You can add as many comments as you need before submitting — Warp batches them so the agent receives all your feedback at once instead of processing changes one at a time. | ||
| Click **Add comment** on any line or block of code, then describe what needs to change. Warp anchors each comment to the exact file and line, so the agent knows precisely what to fix. | ||
| Add every comment before submitting. Warp sends the complete batch at once, rather than asking the agent to process changes one at a time. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Add every comment before submitting. Warp sends the complete batch at once, rather than asking the agent to process changes one at a time. | |
| Add as many comments as you need before you submit. Warp sends the complete batch at once, rather than asking the agent to process changes one at a time. |
| Once you've reviewed each file and left comments, submit the complete batch. The agent applies the requested changes in one pass and returns an updated diff. | ||
|
|
||
| Review the updated diff to verify the fixes. Repeat this cycle until the code meets your standards: comment, submit, review. | ||
| Review the updated diff to verify the fixes. Repeat the cycle until the code meets your standards. Comment, submit, then review. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Review the updated diff to verify the fixes. Repeat the cycle until the code meets your standards. Comment, submit, then review. | |
| Review the updated diff to verify the fixes. Repeat the cycle until the code meets your standards: comment, submit, then review. |
This colon is okay.
| You now have a structured workflow for reviewing AI-generated code in Warp. It combines visual diff review, inline comments, and batch feedback. This workflow works with Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, or the Warp Agent. | ||
|
|
||
| Explore related guides and features: | ||
| Explore related guides and features. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Explore related guides and features. | |
| Explore related guides and features: |
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
|
/oz-review |
|
I'm re-reviewing this pull request in response to a review request. You can view the conversation on Warp. I completed the review and no human review was requested for this pull request. Comment Powered by Oz |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overview
This PR polishes wording and structure across the AI-generated code review guide, the product manager workflows guide, and the cloud agent environments page. The changes are mostly documentation copy edits, but a few changed lines violate repository documentation style requirements around frontmatter descriptions and callout usage.
Concerns
- The code review guide frontmatter description is now two sentences; docs descriptions must be a single 50-160 character sentence.
- A quick review checklist was moved into a note callout, but callouts should stay to a sentence or two rather than carry body content.
- The environments page still has consecutive callouts after editing one of them; the style guide says callouts should never be consecutive.
Verdict
Found: 0 critical, 3 important, 0 suggestions
Request changes
Comment /warp-agent-review on this pull request to retrigger a review (up to 3 times on the same pull request).
Powered by Oz
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
|
/oz-review |
|
I'm re-reviewing this pull request in response to a review request. You can view the conversation on Warp. I completed the review and no human review was requested for this pull request. Comment Powered by Oz |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overview
This PR polishes agent workflow guides and splits the cloud agent environments content into overview, configuration, and troubleshooting pages. The split improves scannability, but a few docs-quality issues need to be fixed before merge.
Concerns
- The environments split removes at least one published section anchor from the original page without a compatibility strategy, so existing deep links can stop landing on the moved content.
- One updated frontmatter description is now two sentences, which violates the docs meta-description style.
- The new environment configuration page adds a screenshot figure without the required standard width.
Verdict
Found: 0 critical, 3 important, 1 suggestions
Request changes
Comment /warp-agent-review on this pull request to retrigger a review (up to 3 times on the same pull request).
Powered by Oz
|
|
||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| ## Container user and permissions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/platform/environments/#container-user-and-permissions will no longer land on the moved content, and URL fragments cannot be handled by vercel.json. Preserve compatibility on the overview page or add an explicit legacy anchor that points readers to the new section.
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
…s.mdx Co-authored-by: warp-for-oss[bot] <277970191+warp-for-oss[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
…ments.mdx Co-authored-by: warp-for-oss[bot] <277970191+warp-for-oss[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>
![warp-agent-staging[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/2196476?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overview
This PR restructures cloud-agent environment documentation and refines two agent workflow guides. The current pages build and render, but two publishing requirements remain.
Concerns
Verdict
Checks: lint
Found: 0 critical, 2 important, 0 suggestions
Request changes
Review run
https://oz.staging.warp.dev/runs/01a0498b-534d-7b54-85d0-73bf3a6f9f1b
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overview
This PR restructures cloud-agent environment documentation and refines two agent workflow guides. The updated description rule permits the reviewed two-sentence description, and the current diff has no remaining blocking findings.
Verdict
Checks: CI ✅ · typecheck ✅ · build ✅ · internal links ✅ · visual verification ✅ (author attestation and local rendered-page review)
Found: 0 critical, 0 important, 0 suggestions
Approve
Review run
https://oz.staging.warp.dev/runs/01a0498b-534d-7b54-85d0-73bf3a6f9f1b
1 participant
Summary
Content design
Validation
git diff --checknpm run buildConversation
https://staging.warp.dev/conversation/630aa180-e53f-4ea0-ba9f-459097306915
Co-Authored-By: Warp agent@warp.dev