Files
brojs-task-6a22c713fd30e81c…/main.py
T

118 lines
3.8 KiB
Python

"""LangGraph code review agent.
Implementation follows assignment:
- State: CodeReviewState with 4 criteria.
- Nodes: review_and_critique, rewrite.
- Graph: START -> review_and_critique -> (ok -> END) or (needs_revision & round<max_rounds -> rewrite -> review_and_critique).
- Uses LangGraph and LangChain OpenAI for LLM calls.
- Structured output for critique via Pydantic model.
- Demo function sort_numbers.
"""
from __future__ import annotations
import os
from typing import TypedDict, Dict
from langgraph.graph import StateGraph, END
from langchain_openai import ChatOpenAI
from langchain_core.messages import HumanMessage
from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
# ---------- State ----------
class CodeReviewState(TypedDict):
code: str
draft_review: str
criteria_scores: Dict[str, int]
weakest_criterion: str
verdict: str
round: int
max_rounds: int
# ---------- LLM ----------
# Use OpenAI only
llm = ChatOpenAI(temperature=0)
# ---------- Nodes ----------
class CritiqueOutput(BaseModel):
review: str = Field(..., description="Draft review text")
scores: Dict[str, int] = Field(..., description="Scores 0-10 for each criterion")
weakest_criterion: str = Field(..., description="Criterion with lowest score")
verdict: str = Field(..., description="'ok' or 'needs_revision'")
def review_and_critique(state: CodeReviewState) -> CodeReviewState:
code = state["code"]
prompt = f"""
Write a concise code review (3-6 bullet points) for the following Python function. Focus on style, correctness, and potential improvements.
```python
{code}
```
Then evaluate the review on four criteria (PEP8, type_hints, edge_cases, naming) on a scale 0-10.
Return a JSON object with keys: review (string), scores (dict), weakest_criterion (string), verdict ('ok' if all scores >=7 else 'needs_revision').
"""
response = llm.invoke([HumanMessage(content=prompt)])
data = CritiqueOutput.model_validate_json(response.content)
state["draft_review"] = data.review
state["criteria_scores"] = data.scores
state["weakest_criterion"] = data.weakest_criterion
state["verdict"] = data.verdict
return state
def rewrite(state: CodeReviewState) -> CodeReviewState:
crit = state["weakest_criterion"]
review = state["draft_review"]
prompt = f"""
The review below is weak in the {crit} criterion. Rewrite the review to improve that aspect.
Original review:
{review}
"""
new_review = llm.invoke([HumanMessage(content=prompt)])
state["draft_review"] = new_review.content
state["round"] += 1
return state
# ---------- Graph ----------
builder = StateGraph(CodeReviewState)
builder.add_node("review_and_critique", review_and_critique)
builder.add_node("rewrite", rewrite)
builder.set_entry_point("review_and_critique")
# After initial review_and_critique, decide to end if verdict ok
builder.add_conditional_edges(
"review_and_critique",
lambda state: state["verdict"] == "ok",
{"ok": END, "needs_revision": "rewrite"},
)
# After rewrite, go back to review_and_critique if rounds remain
builder.add_conditional_edges(
"rewrite",
lambda state: "review_and_critique" if state["round"] < state["max_rounds"] else END,
{"review_and_critique": "review_and_critique", END: END}
)
graph = builder.compile()
# ---------- Demo ----------
def sort_numbers(arr):
return sorted(arr)
if __name__ == "__main__":
code_str = "def sort_numbers(arr):\n return sorted(arr)\n"
initial_state: CodeReviewState = {
"code": code_str,
"draft_review": "",
"criteria_scores": {},
"weakest_criterion": "",
"verdict": "",
"round": 0,
"max_rounds": 2,
}
result = graph.invoke(initial_state)
print("Final state:")
print(result)