Understanding Practitioners' Expectations on Clear Code Review Comments
Junkai Chen, Zhenhao Li, Qiheng Mao, Xing Hu, Kui Liu, Xin Xia
Abstract
The code review comment (CRC) is pivotal in the process of modern code review. It provides reviewers with the opportunity to identify potential bugs, offer constructive feedback, and suggest improvements. Clear and concise code review comments (CRCs) facilitate the communication between developers and are crucial to the correct understanding of the identified issues and proposed solutions. Despite the importance of CRCs' clarity, there is still a lack of guidelines on what constitutes a good clarity and how to evaluate it. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive study on understanding and evaluating the clarity of CRCs. We first derive a set of attributes related to the clarity of CRCs, namely RIE attributes (i.e., Relevance, Informativeness, and Expression), as well as their corresponding evaluation criteria based on our literature review and survey with practitioners. We then investigate the clarity of CRCs in open-source projects written in nine programming languages and find that a large portion (i.e., 28.8%) of the CRCs lack the clarity in at least one of the attributes. Finally, we explore the potential of automatically evaluating the clarity of CRCs by proposing ClearCRC. Experimental results show that ClearCRC with pre-trained language models is promising for effective evaluation of the clarity of CRCs, achieving a balanced accuracy up to 73.04% and a F-1 score up to 94.61%. CCS Concepts: • Software and its engineering → Software creation and management.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 2cdfa76c-214a-4710-80f9-aca990aa1ea8Cited by top-tier papers4
- Defects4Log: Benchmarking LLMs for Logging Code Defect Detection and ReasoningXin Wang, Zhenhao Li, Zishuo DingASE 2025 · 1 citation
- From Static to Dynamic: Benchmarking Real-World Code Review with MCR-BenchDewu Zheng, Yanlin Wang, Xiwen Wang, Kefeng Duan et al.ISSTA 2026
- Towards Secure Logging: Characterizing and Benchmarking Logging Code Security Issues with LLMsHe Yang Yuan, Xin Wang, Kundi Yao, An Ran Chen et al.FSE 2026
- SecureReviewer: Enhancing Large Language Models for Secure Code Review through Secure-Aware Fine-TuningFang Liu, Simiao Liu, Yinghao Zhu, Xiaoli Lian et al.ICSE 2026
Builds on14
- CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and GenerationYue Wang, Weishi Wang, Shafiq R. Joty, Steven C. H. HoiEMNLP 2021 · 1,224 citations
- Automating code review activities by large-scale pre-trainingZhiyu Li, Shuai Lu, Daya Guo, Nan Duan et al.FSE 2022 · 195 citations
- Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review AutomationRosalia Tufano, Simone Masiero, Antonio Mastropaolo, Luca Pascarella et al.ICSE 2022 · 149 citations
- Exploring the Potential of ChatGPT in Automated Code Refinement: An Empirical StudyQi Guo, Junming Cao, Xiaofei Xie, Shangqing Liu et al.ICSE 2024 · 107 citations
- What Makes a Good Commit Message?Yingchen Tian, Yuxia Zhang, Klaas-Jan Stol, Lin Jiang et al.ICSE 2022 · 90 citations
Related papers
- EvaCRC: Evaluating Code Review CommentsLanxin Yang, Jinwei Xu, Yifan Zhang, He Zhang et al.FSE 2023 · 14 citations
- Towards Automating Code Review ActivitiesRosalia Tufano, Luca Pascarella, Michele Tufano, Denys Poshyvanyk et al.ICSE 2021 · 4 citations
- R2I: A Relative Readability Metric for Decompiled CodeHaeun Eom, Dohee Kim, Sori Lim, Hyungjoon Koo et al.FSE 2024 · 6 citations
- Are we building on the rock? on the importance of data preprocessing for code summarizationLin Shi, Fangwen Mu, Xiao Chen, Song Wang et al.FSE 2022 · 65 citations
- LAURA: Enhancing Code Review Generation with Context-Enriched Retrieval-Augmented LLMYuxin Zhang, Yuxia Zhang, Zeyu Sun, Yanjie Jiang et al.ASE 2025 · 8 citations
