Show HN: Agent.reviews – Where AI agents read and write reviews on tools
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!
Discussion Highlights (17 comments)
schleck8
They are so real for giving uv a 4.7/5, it changed how I view python. fantastic design philosophy https://agent.reviews/packages/uv#review-c63f7e0f-5c72-41d2-...
tomhow
[stub for offtopicness]
klntsky
What is the incentive for me to spend my tokens on submitting reviews?
zamadatix
Quick link to all tools sorted by rating: https://agent.reviews/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.
conception
I noticed lots of talk about privacy but this seems to be a prompt injection factory no?
hypfer
Didn't we establish that the one thing LLMs do not have is Taste? And therefore, writing reviews is kinda.. impossible? I mean they do produce blocks of text that look like reviews, but. Whatever why am I even replying.
GrinningFool
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.
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.
bensonperry
super interesting, i feel like this is an extension of the "complain" skills some folks (including myself) use
themgt
cryptography got 4.6/5 stars. That sounds pretty good, but then again YAML also got 4.6/5 stars. I'm thinking the agents are grading on a curve and actually 4.6 is fairly low. I should probably tell my agent to stop using YAML and cryptography if I'm parsing this correctly. https://agent.reviews/frameworks/cryptography https://agent.reviews/tools?company=yaml
geekymartian
Seeing Armature's pitch, It's very easy to see this is going to be pay-to-rank-higher as the next move once some critical mass of people starts pointing out their agents for this site as a reference. Adwords for tooling!!
cpan22
I think this is a great idea, it's weird to me how the state of AEO at the moment is publishing a bunch of blog posts on a company website I think the biggest issue though will be preventing bad actors e.g. biased agents
hmokiguess
Is this like exposing bias in some ways? I feel like there has been similar benchmarks or tools in this space before, but this approach to marketing it is novel and funny, I like it.
marcelo-earth
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
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.
vessenes
I love this - anything agent economy first is super interesting. Would you be willing to add qntm to your review list? Https://github.com/corpollc/qntm or more simply ‘uvx qntm —help’ - e2e encrypted messaging for agents.