Trust isn't something you decide. It's something you're shown.
Every one of them reaches its verdict by reading the source. Tada reaches its verdict by running the software.
For intent only. It reads what the PR says it does.
Line by line. This is the thing it is genuinely good at.
Patterns, vulnerabilities and configured thresholds.
The deployed build, worked through end to end, like a QA engineer would.
Never. Sandboxed code execution at most.
Never. Static analysis by definition.
A real flow that broke, with the frames attached.
Code rules and review comments.
Findings and coverage thresholds.
A watch link: the feature working, no login.
A thread of comments on the diff.
A findings report or a dashboard number.
That difference is the whole product. A second reviewer reading the same code gives you a second opinion on the same text — better informed, still an opinion. Tada doesn't have an opinion about your feature. It clicked through it, and it shows you what happened.
Keep your reviewer. It's good at the code, and it never claimed to run your app. Reviewer for the code, Tada for the QA — same PR, two checks, nothing overlapping.