This product was not featured by Product Hunt yet. It will not be visible on their landing page and won't be ranked (cannot win product of the day regardless of upvotes).
Product upvotes vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product comments vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvote speed vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvotes and comments
Waiting for data. Loading
Product vs the next 3
Loading
Acrity
AI code review with adversarial consensus
Acrity reviews pull requests through multiple AI specialists—architecture, spec validation, QA/behavior, and security—then challenges findings and synthesizes one traceable verdict with cost, token, and timing visibility.
Hey Product Hunt 👋
I’m Auguimar, maker of Acrity.
I built Acrity because code review is becoming a real bottleneck for engineering teams.
Teams need to ship faster, but every PR still needs careful review: architecture, requirements, regressions, edge cases, security, and production risk. Manual review is valuable, but it is hard to scale deeply across every change.
Acrity takes an adversarial approach to AI code review.
Instead of one model giving one opinion, each pull request is reviewed through multiple specialized lenses:
🧠 Architect — architecture, layers, coupling, and project rules
📋 Spec Validator — diff vs task and acceptance criteria
🧪 QA / Behavior — regressions, risky behavior, and edge cases
🔐 Security — security-sensitive changes and risky patterns
Then a Chairman consolidates the findings, removes noise, resolves conflicts, and produces one traceable verdict with evidence.
A few things I care a lot about:
• findings should be challenged before becoming decisions
• review should produce evidence, not generic comments
• teams should see time, tokens, model calls, and cost per PR
• different models/providers can be used across rounds to reduce blind spots
• the review should fit the workflow teams already use
Acrity connects with GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Jira, Linear, ClickUp, and native issue trackers.
There is a trial available today.
I’d be very grateful for honest feedback from engineers, tech leads, founders, and teams reviewing real PRs every day.
What feels useful?
What feels noisy?
What is missing?
What would make this trustworthy enough for your team?
Thanks for checking it out — happy to answer anything.
About Acrity on Product Hunt
“AI code review with adversarial consensus”
Acrity was submitted on Product Hunt and earned 0 upvotes and 4 comments, placing #118 on the daily leaderboard. Acrity reviews pull requests through multiple AI specialists—architecture, spec validation, QA/behavior, and security—then challenges findings and synthesizes one traceable verdict with cost, token, and timing visibility.
On the analytics side, Acrity competes within Software Engineering, Developer Tools and Artificial Intelligence — topics that collectively have 1M followers on Product Hunt. The dashboard above tracks how Acrity performed against the three products that launched closest to it on the same day.
Who hunted Acrity?
Acrity was hunted by Acrity. A “hunter” on Product Hunt is the community member who submits a product to the platform — uploading the images, the link, and tagging the makers behind it. Hunters typically write the first comment explaining why a product is worth attention, and their followers are notified the moment they post. Around 79% of featured launches on Product Hunt are self-hunted by their makers, but a well-known hunter still acts as a signal of quality to the rest of the community. See the full all-time top hunters leaderboard to discover who is shaping the Product Hunt ecosystem.
For a complete overview of Acrity including community comment highlights and product details, visit the product overview.
Acrity