From 934384c1951c4511d107fc3eb3cb03dd1d98d667 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ajianaz Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 12:26:09 +0700 Subject: [PATCH] feat(review): moderate-explanation style in findings prompt MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Empirical study (n=34, arXiv:2607.24601): full explanations maximize perceived trust but NOT agreement — moderate explanations achieve the highest developer agreement (89.22%). Instruct the reviewer to keep each finding at severity + short reason (1-3 sentences) + code evidence, avoiding long reasoning chains. Refs #525 --- src/engine/llm.rs | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/src/engine/llm.rs b/src/engine/llm.rs index 56d8525..016e63f 100644 --- a/src/engine/llm.rs +++ b/src/engine/llm.rs @@ -226,6 +226,14 @@ Return a JSON array of objects with these fields: - "body": string — detailed explanation with specific code reference - "suggested_fix": string or null — optional fix suggestion +EXPLANATION STYLE (moderate-explanation principle, arXiv:2607.24601): +Keep each finding at moderate depth: severity + a short reason (1-3 +sentences) + the specific code evidence it points to. Do NOT include +long reasoning chains, step-by-step derivations, or exhaustive +justifications — overly long explanations reduce agreement with the +finding without adding value. Trust the reader to reason from the +evidence. + If no issues are found, return: [] Return ONLY the JSON array. No markdown code fences, no explanation, no conversational text.