I've seen that agents can build real, working, Stripe integrations. But not necessarily correct ones. I've seen it do non-idempotent database operations in webhook handlers and also call Stripe APIs as a side-effect in synchronous flows.

Agents grind until the integration works in the happy path, but the devil is in the details as always.

> Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR

How does a 5k display replace a 6k display? Are they giving up on 6k? Disappointing.

I experimented with a command for atomic commits a while ago. It explicitly instructed the agent to review the diff and group related changes to produce a commit history where every HEAD state would work correctly. I tried to get it to use `git add -p`, but it never seemed to follow those instructions. Might be time for another go at this with a skill.

> You could take an editor session, a diff, or a pull request and automatically split it into a series of more focused commits that are easier for people to review. This is one of the cases where the AI can reduce human review labor

I feel this should be a bigger focus than it is. All the AI code review start up are mostly doing “hands off” code review. It’s just an agent reviewing everything.

Why not have an agent create a perfect “review plan” for human consumption? Split the review up in parts that can be individually (or independently) reviewed and then fixed by the coding agent. Have a proper ordering in files (GitHub shows files in a commit alphabetically, which is suboptimal), and hide boring details like function implementations that can be easily unit tested.

Yes, you’re right for 4.5 and 5.2. Hence they’re focusing on improving the opposite thing and thus are actually converging.