Bugbot PR Review
Bugbot is an additional review signal over a real PR diff.
Use the right surface
After this you can pick Bugbot for the right job and define done.
Done means you can run BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. and interpret its output without surrendering merge judgment.
AI review adds signal in the PR flow, but the human still owns the merge.
Use BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. when a PR needs AI review for bugs, security or code-quality issues. Keep the boundary narrow.
Start small. Name the job, attach the context that proves the point and decide what evidence would make the output trustworthy.
Read the loop before touching the controls. The first beat frames the work, the second uses Cursor, the third checks the result and the fourth leaves a handoff someone else can inspect.
Interactive diagram. Tab through its regions; each focused region shows its detail in the panel below.
Run this loop in a real repo.
- Entry point
- BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. repository integration, PR checks and comments
- Source
- BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. docs, help pages, leadership dashboard and June 2026 Bugbot changelog
Use the source as the product reference.
Ask Cursor for an output you can inspect.
If the output cannot be checked, narrow the task before you continue.
A good run leaves a file, setting, screenshot, command result or written claim you can verify.
Takeaway. Done means you can run BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. and interpret its output without surrendering merge judgment.
Self-check
QWhen should you reach for BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs.?
Run it
After this you can do the task with clear scope and one proof point.
Treat this as a short practice loop, not a product tour. The task should be small enough that you can inspect the result without trusting the summary.
- 1Set the config knobs: which repos BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. watches, scrutiny level, per-PR versus manual runs, and whether autofix is on.
- 2Let PR comments, CI context and model blocklists inform the review, expecting it to resolve 70-80%+ of real issues.
- 3Inspect findings against the diff and approve each fix yourself; graduate to autofix only once you trust the pattern.
- 4Read the 30-day leadership dashboard to see issue resolution across the team.
The exercise is complete only when the proof matches the requested outcome. If the proof is weak, reduce the scope or fix the context instead of adding more instructions.
Keep the task small enough to review.
The config (repos, scrutiny, per-PR versus manual, autofix) matches the team's trust level.
Takeaway. Stop when you have proof: BugbotCursor's automated PR reviewer that posts inline findings and can push fix commits from isolated VMs. is reviewing the intended PR diff and findings cite concrete code paths..
Self-check
QWhich habit makes this workflow safe to use on a real project?
Check it
After this you can find the first failed check before changing tools.
Verification decides the next move.
Interactive diagram. Tab through its regions; each focused region shows its detail in the panel below.
Pick a row to see what to look for.
Use the first failure signal as the next prompt. Broad retries usually make the run noisier; a narrow retry gives Cursor a concrete repair target.
No proof means more checking.
Use a real repo or admin setting. Save the prompt, context and proof.
Takeaway. If it fails, find the first failed check.
Self-check
QThe workflow failed. What is the best first move?