Personally I work on a 2 person team, the vast majority of my reviews either have no changes or "hey maybe this thing should be named something else so its more

Personally I work on a 2 person team, the vast majority of my reviews either have no changes or "hey maybe this thing should be named something else so its more consistent". For us the peer review is almost completely for knowledge transfer. Sure we know what each other is working on, but we still have to maintain each others code if something goes wrong and the other is not available. So I agree with this 100%. Even in bigger organizations where the peer review was more formal, I feel like that is still the primary goal. I do fail to see the benefit of this, especially looking at the price of it. Outside of maybe scripts? I can't really see how much they can actually help without the context of the larger application. Without that context can they really provide more benefit than AWS CodeGuru (or similar) could offer?