Code Review for Claude Code
adocomplete
67 points
39 comments
March 09, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 50.9ms across 3,471 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Code-review-graph: persistent code graph that cuts Claude Code token usage tirthkanani · 11 pts · March 09, 2026 · 72% similar
- The Claude Code Leak mergesort · 79 pts · April 02, 2026 · 71% similar
- How I'm Productive with Claude Code neilkakkar · 161 pts · March 23, 2026 · 70% similar
- Learn Claude Code by doing, not reading taubek · 218 pts · March 30, 2026 · 68% similar
- The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode alex000kim · 1057 pts · March 31, 2026 · 68% similar
Discussion Highlights (9 comments)
CharlesW
Interesting: "Reviews are billed on token usage and generally average $15–25, scaling with PR size and complexity."
simianwords
nice but why is this not a system prompt? what's the value add here?
Bnjoroge
what are the implications for the tens of code review platforms that have recently raised on sky high valuations?
cpncrunch
Does AI review of AI generated code even make sense?
xlii
> We've been running Code Review internally for months: on large PRs (over 1,000 lines changed), 84% get findings, averaging 7.5 issues. On small PRs under 50 lines, that drops to 31%, averaging 0.5 issues. Engineers largely agree with what it surfaces: less than 1% of findings are marked incorrect. So the take would be that 84% heavily Claude driven PRs are riddled with ~7.5 issues worthy bugs. Not a great ad of agent based development quality.
lowsong
> Reviews are billed on token usage and generally average $15–25, scaling with PR size and complexity. You've got to be completely insane to use AI coding tools at this point. This is the subsidised cost to get users to use it, it could trivially end up ten times this amount. Plus, you've got the ultimate perverse incentive where the company that is selling you the model time to create the PRs is also selling you the review of the same PR.
raflueder
Or, just spin up your own review workflow, I've been doing this for the past couple of months after experimenting with Greptile and it works pretty well, example setup below: https://gist.github.com/rlueder/a3e7b1eb40d90c29f587a4a8cb7c... An average of $0.04/review (200+ PRs with two rounds each approx.) total of $19.50 using Opus 4.6 over February. It fills in a gap of working on a solo project and not having another set of eyes to look at changes.
nemo44x
So their business model is to deliver me buggy code and then charge me to fix it?
nolanl
The concept of "AI will review AI-authored PRs" seems completely wrong to me. Why didn't the AI write the correct code in the first place? If it takes 17 rounds of review from 5 different models/harnesses – I don't care. Just spit out the right code the first time. Otherwise I'm wasting my time clicking "review this" over and over until the PR is worth actually having a human look at.