Code review discussions off the whiteboard — structured feedback the author can act on.
Walking through code at a whiteboard surfaces issues faster than line-by-line GitHub comments. BoardSnap captures the discussion output so the author gets clear, actionable feedback — not a verbal summary they have to reconstruct.
Why engineering managers love this workflow
Synchronous code review discussions — where you walk through the code at a whiteboard — are underused because EMs and senior engineers worry about the follow-up. The discussion produces great insights, but translating them into GitHub comments or a written review requires re-creating the logic of the conversation.
BoardSnap removes that barrier. When you review code at a whiteboard — sketching alternative patterns, drawing out the data flow concern, listing required changes — snap the board at the end. BoardSnap AI reads the discussion output and produces a structured list of feedback items the author can act on directly.
The exact flow
- Set up the review framework on the board
Create sections for must-change, consider-changing, and good-to-note feedback. This structure keeps the review actionable rather than a general discussion.
- Sketch architecture alternatives when relevant
If you're suggesting a different pattern, draw it. The sketch becomes part of the board capture — the author gets the visual alongside the written feedback.
- Write specific feedback, not vague concerns
Instead of 'this could be better,' write 'move this logic to the service layer — here's why.' Specific feedback on the board produces specific action items in the summary.
- Mark required vs. optional changes clearly
Required changes block merge. Optional changes are suggestions. Make the distinction clear on the board so BoardSnap captures it in the summary.
- Snap and send to the author
The BoardSnap summary is the code review document. Send it to the author as a follow-up — they get structured, written feedback they can work through systematically.
What you'll get out of it
- Author gets structured written feedback, not a summary of what was said
- Alternative patterns sketched on the board captured in the output
- Required vs. optional changes explicitly separated
- Review discussions documented for future reference and onboarding
- Faster than translating a verbal review into GitHub comments
Frequently asked
Is this for walk-through code reviews or GitHub PR reviews?
BoardSnap is for synchronous walk-through reviews done at a whiteboard. GitHub PR comment reviews happen in the browser — BoardSnap captures the in-person discussion output that feeds back into GitHub.
Can BoardSnap read code snippets written on the whiteboard?
Short code snippets are read as text. Long code blocks on a whiteboard are hard to write and read — BoardSnap captures the logic description and pseudo-code better than exact syntax.
What if the code review discussion gets heated — does the board capture the disagreement?
If it's written on the board, it's in the summary. For sensitive technical disagreements, the EM can edit the summary before sending to focus it on the actionable feedback.
Engineering Managers: try this on your next code review.
Three taps. Action items in your hand before the room clears.