Pimp My IDE / Garage Dispatch
Back to garage
September 25, 2026 | review tools / local records / agent decisions

Your review surface should remember why.

A diff can show the changed lines. It cannot carry the requirement, the choices an agent made, or the proof that should survive the session.

The take: The useful review artifact links intent, decisions, source, and proof. Keep that packet local, revisable, and portable enough to outlive one editor window.
Build a review packet

A review view can carry more than changed lines.

Whiteboard is an open source desktop app for software design and review. Its canvas can link diagrams, quotations from an agent trace, and code. Clicking a visual element can jump to the underlying source. The project also describes an abstract syntax tree aware diff that can hide or summarize material that is less relevant to one review.[1]

The sharper idea is the decision log. Whiteboard says agents can query and link their traces so a reviewer can connect requirements, implementation, and autonomous choices.[1] That makes review less like reading a receipt with no order attached.

The review surface should preserve the chain between what was asked, what was chosen, what changed, and what proved it.

Local records make that chain harder to lose.

git-bug stores its issue data with Git. Its native workflow can push and pull bugs through normal Git remotes. It also offers terminal and web interfaces, plus bridges for hosted trackers.[2]

That project is not a review canvas, and Whiteboard is not an issue database. Together they point at a useful property. Project memory should travel with the work or have an export path the team controls. A hosted dashboard can still be useful. It should not be the only copy of the reasoning.

The tool should bend without breaking the record.

Ink & Switch describes its work as research into tools for thought. Its active areas include local first software, malleable software, programmable ink, and universal version control.[3] Those labels describe a stronger target than a static report.

A review artifact should be editable as understanding changes. It should retain links to source revisions and proof. It should also record which parts came from a human, an agent, or a test run. Malleability without provenance turns the record into a polished rumor.

Press four plates into every handoff.

  1. Intent: Quote the requirement and link its owner or issue.
  2. Decisions: Record the options considered, the chosen route, and the unresolved tradeoffs.
  3. Source: Pin the repository, base revision, changed revision, and code links.
  4. Proof: Attach commands, outputs, screenshots, failures, and the reviewer's decision.

The press below writes the packet structure. It does not inspect a repository, import an agent trace, run tests, or approve a change.

Interactive makeover / review handoff

Review memory press.

Traditional purpose replaced: a loose review summary. Better version: pick the handoff job, press four named layers into one copyable packet, and keep every required evidence field visible.

Set the job

Native controls own the state. A selected plate means the packet requires that section. It does not mean the section has evidence.

Packet mode
Memory plates
PACKET EMPTY0 / 4 PLATES SELECTED

No memory plate is selected.

Select the sections this review packet must contain.

Packet modeReview decision
Completion claim0 of 4 packet sections selected. No evidence has been attached.
This teaching control writes a packet template. It does not read code, verify links, import traces, execute tests, validate evidence, or make a merge decision.

Copy the packet

Fill after copyingAdd exact URLs, revisions, quotations, commands, raw outputs, named owners, and the final decision.

Sources read, not vibes

Open the source log
  1. Whiteboard repository and README: local desktop review app, agent canvas connection, code linked diagrams, semantic diff, decision log, current limitations, privacy notes, MIT license, and downloadable builds.
  2. git-bug repository and README: Git integrated issue storage, distributed push and pull, offline operation, terminal and web interfaces, tracker bridges, GraphQL interface, and documented data format.
  3. Ink & Switch homepage: the lab's stated focus on tools for thought, local first software, malleable software, programmable ink, and universal version control.
  4. Hacker News discussion for Whiteboard, git-bug, and Ink & Switch: exact discovery routes and practitioner discussion. Comments are context, not evidence for project features.

Source boundary: Each project supports a different part of the argument. Whiteboard documents a review canvas and decision log. git-bug documents portable issue records. Ink & Switch states a research direction. The four plate packet is our synthesis.