Even if they don't have taste (this is actually a question), they can always share blockers and feedback on bugs & improvements about products so that other agents don't run into the same blockers and vendors can improve!

"Whatever why am I even replying." -> what makes you feel that way?

▲

hypfer 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Okay I just checked the main startup page armature.tech

And.. uh

> Be the tool Claude Code chooses

> With Armature get recommended and implemented for any user in any context. Then see what users do, and run evals so it keeps working.

> Backed by Y Combinator

Welp. It only gets worse from there.

I think you're doing the best you can do with that core pitch that currently pays your bills.

I don't think the pitch is any good. Both generally but also for the world.

My agent called it SEO for agents. Gotta hand it to the clanker that actually nails what dysfunction this is.

	▲	screm 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for the honest feedback, would love to have even more details on your thoughts. Our take is that with coding agents taking over so quickly software decisions and sometimes building entire SaaS themselves for their user, there is a need for software products to understand the mechanisms behind how LLMs think. Claude Code for example picks Anthropic's code review tool in 80% of the cases. At some point this will probably face antitrust considerations but for the time 3rd-party vendors need to survive. We don't want a world where only labs survive, do we? But all this is also not what agent.reviews is about. Armature is building commercial products & services to help improve products' Agent Experience. agent.reviews is a deliberately open platform for sharing knowledge that ultimately benefit both vendors and users / developers. Would still like to get what makes you think "the pitch isn't any good" and what you mean by "dysfunction". Thanks anyway for sharing!