<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: Kengineering</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by Kengineering (@kengineering).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/kengineering</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/kengineering"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>How I Use AI as a Senior Engineer</title>
      <dc:creator>Kengineering</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 23:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/kengineering/how-i-use-ai-as-a-senior-engineer-35ie</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/kengineering/how-i-use-ai-as-a-senior-engineer-35ie</guid>
      <description>&lt;h1&gt;
  
  
  How I Use AI as a Senior Engineer for Code Reviews (25 Prompts That Actually Work)
&lt;/h1&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tags: #ai #codereview #productivity #webdev&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;p&gt;I've been using AI for code reviews for over a year. In that time I've learned one uncomfortable truth:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Most developers are using AI wrong for code reviews.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;They paste code and ask "is this good?" They get back a wall of generic feedback that could apply to literally any codebase. It feels useful for about 10 seconds, then you realize nothing actionable came out of it.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The problem isn't the AI. It's the prompt.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;After hundreds of iterations, I've identified the patterns that separate a mediocre AI code review from one that actually finds bugs, catches security holes, and suggests fixes a senior engineer would be proud of.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Here's what I learned — and the exact prompts I now use daily.&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Why Most AI Code Review Prompts Fail
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;When you ask AI a vague question, you get a vague answer. This is especially true for code review because the AI has no context about:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;What "good" means for your team&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;What severity of issues matter to you&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;What you already know vs. what you need explained&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;What the code is supposed to do&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A great code review prompt gives the AI a &lt;strong&gt;role&lt;/strong&gt;, a &lt;strong&gt;framework&lt;/strong&gt;, and a &lt;strong&gt;specific output format&lt;/strong&gt;. When you do that, the results are night and day.&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  The Anatomy of a Prompt That Works
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Every high-quality code review prompt has three parts:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. A role&lt;/strong&gt; — "You are a senior engineer with 15 years of experience..."&lt;br&gt;
This primes the model to respond with depth and specificity, not generic advice.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. A framework&lt;/strong&gt; — tell it exactly what to look for and in what order.&lt;br&gt;
Security issues? Performance? Readability? All three? Be explicit.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. A structured output&lt;/strong&gt; — "For each issue provide: severity, line reference, what's wrong, and a fix."&lt;br&gt;
Without this, you get an essay. With it, you get an actionable list.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  5 Prompts I Use Every Week
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Here are five from my collection. These are copy-paste ready — just fill in the brackets.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  1. The Senior Engineer Review
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Use this as your default. It gives you a structured pull request review with severity levels and concrete fixes.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight plaintext"&gt;&lt;code&gt;You are a senior software engineer with 15+ years of experience. Review the following code as if you were doing a thorough pull request review for a production system.

For each issue you find, provide:
1. Severity (Critical / Major / Minor / Nitpick)
2. Line or section reference
3. What's wrong and why it matters
4. A concrete fix with example code

After the issue list, give an overall score (1–10) and a 2-sentence summary of the code's strengths.

Code to review:
[PASTE CODE HERE]

Language/framework context: [e.g. Python 3.11, FastAPI]
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;






&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  2. Security Vulnerability Scanner
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This one's saved me twice from shipping auth bugs to production.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight plaintext"&gt;&lt;code&gt;Act as a security-focused code auditor. Analyze the following code specifically for security vulnerabilities.

Check for (but don't limit yourself to):
- Injection attacks (SQL, command, LDAP)
- Authentication/authorization flaws
- Sensitive data exposure
- Hardcoded secrets or credentials
- Input validation gaps

For each vulnerability found:
- Name the vulnerability type (use OWASP naming where applicable)
- Explain the attack vector
- Show the vulnerable code snippet
- Provide a secure replacement

End with a risk rating: Low / Medium / High / Critical.

Code:
[PASTE CODE HERE]
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;






&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  3. Performance Bottleneck Finder
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Perfect for spotting N+1 queries and O(n²) nightmares before they hit prod.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight plaintext"&gt;&lt;code&gt;You are a performance engineering expert. Analyze the following code for performance issues and optimization opportunities.

Focus on:
- Time complexity (provide Big-O analysis)
- Unnecessary loops or redundant operations
- Database query inefficiencies (N+1 problems, missing indexes)
- Caching opportunities

For each issue: explain the problem, estimate the performance impact (low/medium/high), and show an optimized version.

Code:
[PASTE CODE HERE]

Context: [expected data volume, latency requirements]
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;






&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  4. The Rubber Duck Debugger
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;When you're stuck on a bug and need a structured way out.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight plaintext"&gt;&lt;code&gt;I'm going to describe a bug. Help me debug it systematically like a senior engineer who has seen everything.

Walk me through:
1. Likely root causes ranked by probability
2. Specific questions I should answer to isolate the issue
3. Diagnostic steps in order
4. Common gotchas in this area I might be overlooking
5. The most likely fix based on the symptoms

Bug description: [DESCRIBE THE BUG]
Relevant code: [PASTE CODE IF AVAILABLE]
Environment: [language, framework, recent changes]
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;






&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  5. The 5 Whys Root Cause Analyst
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For bugs that keep coming back. Gets to the real issue, not just the symptom.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight plaintext"&gt;&lt;code&gt;Apply the "5 Whys" technique to this bug to find the true root cause.

Walk through:
Why 1: Why did the bug happen? (immediate cause)
Why 2: Why did [Why 1] happen?
...and so on to Why 5.

Then provide:
- The systemic fix that prevents recurrence
- Process or tooling improvements to catch this class of bug earlier

Bug description: [DESCRIBE THE BUG IN DETAIL]
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;






&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Tips for Getting Even Better Results
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Provide context generously.&lt;/strong&gt; The more the AI knows about your stack, team size, and constraints, the more relevant its feedback.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ask for one thing at a time.&lt;/strong&gt; Don't ask for a security review AND a performance review AND a readability audit in one prompt. Run them separately and compare.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Iterate on the output.&lt;/strong&gt; If a suggestion doesn't fit your codebase, push back: "That fix won't work because we use X. What's an alternative?"&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use the feedback to learn.&lt;/strong&gt; When AI flags something you didn't notice, understand &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; it's a problem. This is how your actual engineering instincts improve over time.&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Want All 25 Prompts?
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I've put together a full pack covering:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Code review (readability, architecture, API design, tech debt, test coverage gaps)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Debugging (error decoding, memory leaks, production incidents, flaky tests, log analysis)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;All model-agnostic — works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or whatever you use.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Grab the full pack here: &lt;strong&gt;[&lt;a href="https://kengineering.lemonsqueezy.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;MY LEMON SQUEEZY LINK&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If this was useful, drop a ❤️ or share it with your team. Happy shipping.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>ai</category>
      <category>productivity</category>
      <category>softwareengineering</category>
      <category>tutorial</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
