Head of Developer Relations, Tessl.
Explore with your AI assistant
ChatGPT (opens in a new tab)Claude (opens in a new tab)Perplexity (opens in a new tab)Grok (opens in a new tab)
Opens a new chat with a prompt that points the assistant to this archive. What it writes is its own, not the archive's: check any quotation on its passage page before you rely on it. Or add the archive to your assistant as a connector: https://the-ai-record.com/mcp (how).
Head of Developer Relations at Tessl and co-host of AI Native Dev. Previously Field CTO and VP Developer Relations at Snyk, and held roles at ZeroTurnaround and IBM.
Why their word counts: Writes on Tessl's own blog about how Tessl reviews code; a vendor employee, so framing may favor Tessl's product.
Profile from this source, checked 2026-11-04.
Coding agents abruptly changed that reality. They can turn a ticket into a pull request in minutes, so teams end up getting greater numbers of PRs, much faster. Review didn't speed up with them and, as we well know, it became the bottleneck.
Simon MapleHead of Developer Relations · Leader, 
Tessl
Post: Anatomy of an Agentic Code Review, Tessl blog, October 9, 2026, at Introduction.
This has become very powerful to us at Tessl. We have build a maintenance agent that periodically reads historic pull requests, findings and logs, then proposes changes like as pull requests that our team reviews.
Simon MapleHead of Developer Relations · Leader, Tessl
Post: Anatomy of an Agentic Code Review, Tessl blog, October 9, 2026, at 6. A memory.
A verifier runs in seconds, costs almost nothing and gives the same answer every time. Anything a verifier can catch, review shouldn't have to, which leaves the lenses free to spend their attention on problems that genuinely need reasoning about.
Simon MapleHead of Developer Relations · Leader, Tessl
Post: Anatomy of an Agentic Code Review, Tessl blog, October 9, 2026, at Beyond the code review: Tessl verifiers and security findings.