The AI Code Review

How it works

When you have an AI code review available, we read your whole solution and review it the way an experienced developer would. Rather than flagging isolated rule violations, it weighs your code in context: how it's structured, how readable it is, how accessible it is, and how you built it.

You get an overall score out of 10, a short summary, and a breakdown across seven dimensions, each with its own score and findings.

Pro members get an AI code review on every submission. Free members get one a month. The Solution Reports Overview explains how this sits alongside the automated checks everyone gets.

Categories and dimensions

The seven dimensions are grouped into three categories.

Code Quality

• Best Practices: readability, naming, keeping code DRY, error handling, modern syntax, responsive design, and general code hygiene.
• Architecture: how you structure components, manage state, separate concerns, and apply your framework's patterns. Applies to Intermediate challenges and up.
• File Organization: folder structure, naming conventions, and how well your project layout follows its framework's conventions. Applies to Junior challenges and up.
• Testing: whether your tests make meaningful assertions, cover edge cases, and are well organized. Applies to Advanced challenges and up.

Design & UX

• Accessibility: semantic HTML, ARIA, keyboard support, focus management, color contrast, alt text, and forms, judged across your whole solution.

Documentation

• README Quality: how well your README documents the project and reflects on what you learned. The README Quality guide covers this dimension in detail.
• Commit Quality: your commit messages, how you split work across commits, and repository hygiene. The Commit Quality guide covers this dimension in detail.

Reading your findings

Each dimension's findings are grouped into three types:

• Strengths: things you did well and should keep doing.
• Suggestions: improvements that would raise the quality of your code.
• Needs attention: clearer problems worth fixing.

Most findings point to the specific file and line they apply to, with tags for the technology and skill involved, so you can connect the feedback to the exact part of your code. The Documentation dimensions work a little differently: README Quality and Commit Quality look at your README and commit history rather than your source code, so their findings point you to the relevant section or commit instead.

Scores and rating bands

Every score, from the overall down to each dimension, comes with a rating band so you can read it at a glance: Needs Work, Fair, Solid, Great, and Exceptional.

A lower score shows where the most useful practice is right now. Even strong solutions get feedback, so treat the review as a guide for your next step rather than a final grade.

You're not aiming for a perfect score

A 10 out of 10 is rare, and chasing one usually isn't worth it. It's a lot like building to a design file: we don't expect a pixel-perfect match, because pixel-perfect doesn't really exist once you account for different browsers and screen sizes. You get the layout as close as you're happy with, then you move on.

The quality of your code works the same way. Push a solution until you're happy with it, then take what you've learned into your next challenge. Past a certain point you hit diminishing returns, and that time is better spent on something new.

How difficulty changes the review

We calibrate the review to the challenge difficulty, and this works in two ways.

First, which dimensions apply. Simpler challenges are reviewed on fewer dimensions, and more come into play as challenges get harder:

• Newbie: Best Practices, Accessibility, README Quality, Commit Quality
• Junior: adds File Organization
• Intermediate: adds Architecture
• Advanced and Guru: adds Testing

Dimensions that don't apply to a challenge show as locked rather than scored, and they don't count toward your overall score.

Second, the bar within each dimension. We expect more polish from an Advanced solution than a Newbie one, so the same code can read as solid at one level and as a gap at another.

Improving your score

• Start with anything under "Needs attention", then work through the suggestions.
• Use your strengths to see what's already working, so you keep doing it.
• Regenerate the report after making changes to see your updated scores.

Across several challenges, look for patterns. A dimension that's consistently lower than the rest is the clearest signal of where to focus next.

Want to go deeper on a specific dimension? We have dedicated guides for README Quality and Commit Quality.