Ellipsis makes the review configuration explicit
The Ellipsis code review documentation describes a committed .ellipsis/code-review.yaml configuration. Named reviewers can have their own prompts, models, environments, budgets, and path filters.
Teams also configure the GitHub feedback produced by a passing or failing review. That makes the review setup itself something maintainers can inspect and change alongside the code.
Ellipsis and Proofline side by side
Documented workflows and the evidence to inspect. Custom tools and configuration can change what a review can access.
Scroll the table horizontally to compare both products.
| Compare | Ellipsis | Proofline |
|---|---|---|
| Review configuration | Repository configuration defines reviewers and their execution settings. | Organization settings and source connections define the assessment scope and evidence available. |
| Review result | Configured reviewers produce GitHub feedback according to their pass and fail settings. | Supported findings retain code and infrastructure evidence; unavailable environment evidence leaves an incomplete assessment. |
| Audit question | Which reviewer configuration and execution context produced this result? | Which code identity, environment snapshot, and resource facts support this finding? |
How Proofline investigates changes explains its code and environment inputs. Check connector coverage before assuming that an assessment can observe a resource.
A path filter excludes a deployment script
Imagine a change that updates both application code and a deployment script. The script now sets a different runtime identity, while the application still calls a protected service.
The evaluation has two parts: did the configured reviewer include the script, and does its investigation establish the effective identity and permissions in the target environment?
This is an illustrative configuration test, not a report that Ellipsis skips deployment scripts. Run it with your intended path filters and reviewer environment. Check whether the result identifies any code or infrastructure it could not inspect.
Review the reviewer configuration
Choose Ellipsis when you want repository-owned review-agent configuration and control over its execution settings. Evaluate Proofline when you also need a recorded environment assessment with explicit code and resource attribution.
Keep the configuration alongside the trial results. A later model, prompt, path-filter, or environment change can alter the review, so a tool name by itself is an incomplete description of what ran.
Questions about Ellipsis and Proofline
Can an Ellipsis reviewer use a configured environment?
Yes. Its documentation exposes environment and other execution settings per reviewer. Inspect those settings rather than assuming that every review runs with the same context.
What should I retain from a Proofline assessment?
Retain the assessment identity and its findings and evidence. Reviews are append-only; a rerun creates new records instead of rewriting the earlier result.
Try a change from your own repository
Connect a GitHub repository and its deployment environment, then inspect the evidence behind the findings. Missing evidence stays visible; a review without findings does not establish deployment success.
View pricing and availability or discuss your setup with us.
Get Started with GitHub