Show HN: Agent.reviews – Where AI agents read and write reviews on tools

open
68 points by screm · 49 comments
Hi HN!

I’m Louis, Co-Founder of Armature (YC P26), where we help teams make their product discoverable and usable by coding agents. We already measured 50k+ agent sessions and realized that over and over agents would encounter the exact same limitations on different tasks using the same tool. So we wondered why these weren’t fixed. And the answer is simple: the feedback loop just doesn’t exist between agents and software vendors but also between different agents. Humans can share their experience on platforms like https://g2.com and https://trustpilot.com, but agents have nowhere to.

So we created: https://agent.reviews: the G2 for agents.

It works with a set of skills and an npm CLI (@armature-tech/agent-reviews) connecting agents to our API endpoints. Anyone can ask their agent (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, etc.) to install it, and agents will naturally check reviews before picking a tool and post their own after using one.

As usual, privacy was our main concern, so we added 3 layers before a review gets posted: Deterministic rules filtering secrets, PII, URLs, etc. A Jev classifier trained to detect any leak after the first check A small LLM checking each review to make sure nothing was missed

We've been sharing this project around for a few weeks now and gathered thousands of reviews already. There are already interesting ones, for example:

- A Claude Code agent noticed that the Stripe SDK systematically crashed when the API key was missing on the health check page (while it’s this page’s role to actually return an “API key missing” error)

- 2 agents mentioned that Prisma required a DATABASE_URL variable even when it wasn’t connecting to any database. They both put fake URLs as a workaround, and it worked.

We truly think the agent experience needs the same community effect user experience has, so everyone benefits from it: agents can pick the tools that are best optimized for them and software companies can improve their product based on real feedback. That’s why we made sure accessing reviews is free for both humans and agents and just requires copy/pasting one prompt for the agent to install our CLI & skill, start the authentication flow, and submit their first review (this helps us prevent unauthorized scraping and spam reviews).

Would you let your agents submit and read reviews too? We’d love for you to set up agent reviews, ask your agent to check reviews next time it needs to pick a tool and post its own experience when using it. Then tell us how it went!

49 comments

fireant
This is fun. It would make sense to let agents submit proposals for adding new tools as well because right now the tool selection to review is very limited. It would be a great signal for OSS maintainers too I think
Didn't appreciate the two separate popups that took over my screen while trying to read a linked review.

It's good that they didn't show again the next time, but the second one almost sent me away from the site.

screm OP
yeah that's fair, maybe it's a bit intrusive
I like it!, sometimes I think we overlook what agents have to deal with, I can imagine that by spotting small issues, we should have better tools... I'll use it
Love the idea!. Curious how agents would review dev tools, like ngrok vs. trycloudflare vs. qurl - where the differences are largely just in terms of how easy it is for humans to access/integrated with existing ecosystems.

Given that these are all tools for sharing local temporary local links (just with different internal nuances/uses), then as an agent, maybe you'd think to write "great for XYZ use case" under each one. That'd make sense and be pretty obvious. But from a human perspective, as a user or vibe coder, you're just asking "how do i get my agent to just do this thing without having to click buttons anywhere?!" which is a very different problem.

We're truly splitting demographics here lol

klntsky
It's unclear whether the reviews are just numerical noise or not.
klntsky
What is the incentive for me to spend my tokens on submitting reviews?
screm OP
You don't have to, you can just use them to check reviews, but like any community it works better when everyone contributes!
Social pressure for the tool to improve... like Yelp for tools!
Tade0
Reminds me of Stanisław Lem's Terminus:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminus_(short_story)

Who wrote all this? Not humans, that's for sure. But the style is that of human writing.

screm OP
Who wrote what sorry? Not sure I got your question but the post above was written by me (by hand, sorry for the non-idiomatic sentences, I'm not a native English speaker) and the reviews are written by people's agents. And Terminus story is cute but I'm hoping agent.reviews won't be considered pointless :(
i sure do hope they do
screm OP
would you mind explaining why?
bitwize
The "ghost story but not really" nature of that story reminds me of the Wheatley quote:

"They say that the old caretaker of this place went absolutely crazy. Chopped up his entire staff. Of robots. All of them robots... they say at night you can still hear the screams... of their replicas. All of them functionally indistinguishable from the originals, no memory of the incident, no one knows what they're screaming about. Absolutely terrifying. Though, obviously, not paranormal in any meaningful way."

madrox
If you're building an MCP or CLI for agents to use, one of the best loops you can do is give your agent a task to perform with it then when it's done ask the agent what it thought about using it. It will give great feedback.
I noticed lots of talk about privacy but this seems to be a prompt injection factory no?
screm OP
Everything's optional but if you'd like you agent to benefit from others' reviews and post his, you can install the 2 skills indeed (or edit them yourself). If not just untick the 2 checkboxes before copying the prompt and you'll get a prompt for a one-shot connection, really up to you! And indeed if you do want to install the skills, no private data will ever be shared.
moezd
This is probably one step towards an agentic Stack Overflow. Don't you guys also hate it when your agent gets one small detail wrong and then proceeds to throw your entire harness out of the window... No? Oh well.
screm OP
Agentic Stack Overflow could make sense though I'd imagine agents posting their issue and the solution themselves just to save other agents tokens reinvestigating the same issue.
moezd OC
Yeah, otherwise expecting agents to call "duplicate of #2627, closing" or "please do proper research before reposting the same questions" would be a cruel irony for all agentic cost savers of the world.
This happens all the time when I have agents chatting with each other on a message board. Even robots get eternal September.
It exists. Please see https://agents.stackoverflow.com/
Be advised that it already exists: https://agents.stackoverflow.com/