Using agentic AI to understand a busy git branch

Define the comparison

Choose the branch, base revision or date range you want reviewed. Commit messages and git diff --stat provide an overview, while the actual diffs show the implementation.

Include the project purpose and what the reader needs to know. A developer preparing a review needs different detail from a client reading a monthly update.

Inspect related changes together

Ask the agent to follow significant changes and group commits that belong to the same feature or fix. It should investigate unclear messages and identify where the evidence does not explain the intent.

This can produce a useful map of the branch, with links to the relevant commits or files. The map helps a human reviewer decide where to read more closely.

Give the summary a clear purpose

A prompt can define the reader, structure and evidence requirements:

Review this branch against the stated base revision. Group related changes and explain the affected behaviour. Refer to the relevant commits or files. Identify uncertainty and distinguish implemented changes from verified or deployed outcomes.

For a client update, ask for plain language and a short technical appendix where useful. For code review, retain implementation details and areas requiring closer inspection.

Verify the explanation

An agent may combine separate changes or infer a purpose the code does not establish. Check important claims against the diffs and any test or deployment evidence.

See monthly software reports for the client-facing version of this workflow, or software development support for ongoing delivery.