Try Devin for pull requests on a company codebase
A commenter's team tried Devin but found PRs slow and still needing review, so it felt like a junior developer. Task: Suggested implementation: A team at a mid-sized tech company attempts to use Devin to generate pull requests for their codebase. The workflow involves providing Devin with codebase access and PR requirements, expecting it to submit changes. Human developers remain in the loop to review all generated code, effectively treating the tool as a junior developer.; tools: Devin. Human role: Source evidence is unavailable regarding specific human roles.; limitations: Prerequisites include secure codebase access and defined PR standards. Key constraints involve potential slow turnaround times and the necessity of full human code review, which may negate cost savings. Integration uncertainty exists regarding how well Devin handles complex, proprietary code structures..
Tools
Published on Agent Work Atlas:
Overview
A commenter's team tried Devin but found PRs slow and still needing review, so it felt like a junior developer.
Workflow
Suggested implementation: A team at a mid-sized tech company attempts to use Devin to generate pull requests for their codebase. The workflow involves providing Devin with codebase access and PR requirements, expecting it to submit changes. Human developers remain in the loop to review all generated code, effectively treating the tool as a junior developer.
Reported result
Outcome unknown from source. Proposed acceptance check: Measure the time saved by automated PR generation against the time spent on manual code review. If review overhead exceeds generation speed benefits, the tool is deemed ineffective for this use case.
Human role
Source evidence is unavailable regarding specific human roles.
Limitations
Prerequisites include secure codebase access and defined PR standards. Key constraints involve potential slow turnaround times and the necessity of full human code review, which may negate cost savings. Integration uncertainty exists regarding how well Devin handles complex, proprietary code structures.
Try it
Act as a DevOps engineer evaluating Devin for our [replaceable: company name] codebase. 1. Select a small, isolated subset of [replaceable: number] low-risk tickets from [replaceable: project management tool]. 2. Configure Devin with access to [replaceable: repository URL] and specific coding standards. 3. Instruct Devin to generate pull requests for these tickets. 4. Have a senior developer review each PR, recording time-to-review and code quality scores. 5. Compare total time (generation + review) against standard manual development time. 6. Do not merge any code without explicit human approval. 7. Report findings on whether Devin's output reduced overall workload or added review overhead. If inputs are missing, ask for repository access details and ticket examples before proceeding.
Source reports are not independently verified. Publication date is the catalog publication date, not the original article date.