Probably for 5 years now, I’ve made the following recommendation to my teams

If you find yourself commenting on more than a few lines of changes (5 is a good limit), get on a call to give feedback directly. There may be a fundamental misunderstanding between committer and reviewer.

This is a sharp edge for the team and smoothing it out is easiest by setting clear expectations. If a committer gets review bombed on something that they spent serious time, it will be deflating. I say this from personal experience - a previous manager would pedantically swoop into PRs and comment on naming (but like 10-20 comments) or question architecture that already existed outside of the PR changes. Frustrating stuff. I never want to purposefully frustrate anyone, so I’ve focused on the below structures for my teams.

• Review a PR - within 1/2 a business day
• Never just “approve” a PR without writing something - LGTM is sufficient, but better to find one good thing to say
• Rarely mark a PR as “changes requested”
• If you find yourself commenting on more than a few lines of changes (5 is a good limit), get on a call to give feedback directly. There may be a fundamental misunderstanding between committer and reviewer

I didn’t use AI for this, but did plug it into a word counter/spell checker. 2 wordsmisspelled