[HN Gopher] Code Review for Claude Code
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Code Review for Claude Code
        
       Author : adocomplete
       Score  : 35 points
       Date   : 2026-03-09 19:03 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (claude.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (claude.com)
        
       | CharlesW wrote:
       | Interesting: "Reviews are billed on token usage and generally
       | average $15-25, scaling with PR size and complexity."
        
         | karmakaze wrote:
         | At those prices I wonder if it also reviews the design for
         | ineffectiveness in performance or decomposition into
         | maintainable units besides catching the bugs.
         | 
         | Also the examples are weird IMO. Unless it was an edge/corner
         | case the authentication bug would be caught in even a smoke
         | test. And for the ZFS encryption refactor I'd expect a static-
         | typed language to catch type errors unless they're casting from
         | `void*` or something. _Seems like they picked examples by how
         | important /newsworthy the areas were than the technicality of
         | the finds._
        
         | cbovis wrote:
         | This cost seems wild. For comparison GitHub Copilot Code Review
         | is four cents per review once you're outside of the credits
         | included with your subscription.
        
           | 8cvor6j844qw_d6 wrote:
           | Same thoughts.
           | 
           | For comparison, Greptile charges $30 per month for 50
           | reviews, with $1 per additional review.
           | 
           | At average of $15~25 per review, this is way more expensive.
        
         | atonse wrote:
         | Wait, what? So if I'm a paying Max user, i'd still have to pay
         | more? Don't see the value. Would rather have a repo skill to do
         | the code review with existing Claude Max tokens.
        
         | Twixes wrote:
         | Average _per review_? Insane costs, that's potentially
         | thousands per developer. Am I missing something?
        
           | remus wrote:
           | I haven't used it so just spit balling, but surely it depends
           | on the quality of the review? If it picks up lots of issues
           | and prevents downtime then it could work out as worthwhile.
           | What would it cost an engineer with deep knowledge of the
           | codebase to do a similar job? You could spend an hour really
           | digging into a PR, poking around, testing stuff out etc. Im
           | guessing most engineers are paid more than $15-25/hr, not to
           | mention the opportunity cost.
        
       | simianwords wrote:
       | nice but why is this not a system prompt? what's the value add
       | here?
        
         | NoahZuniga wrote:
         | You're paying the same token rate for this as you would if it
         | was just a system prompt. Clearly the scaffolding adds
         | something.
         | 
         | (They mention their github action which seems more like a
         | system prompt)
        
           | simianwords wrote:
           | seems like a very small value add. why is this a blog post -
           | i could do this myself.
        
           | sixothree wrote:
           | Does this only work with github actions? What about Devops
           | and gitlab?
        
       | Bnjoroge wrote:
       | what are the implications for the tens of code review platforms
       | that have recently raised on sky high valuations?
        
         | satvikpendem wrote:
         | Same as all the other companies that built on top of the API
         | and then were obsoleted after the API provider made it a built-
         | in feature.
         | 
         | https://finance.yahoo.com/news/claude-just-killed-startup-sf...
        
           | sixothree wrote:
           | I'm guessing people need to quickly realize Claude is a
           | platform.
        
           | Bnjoroge wrote:
           | bitter lesson applied to platforms
        
       | cpncrunch wrote:
       | Does AI review of AI generated code even make sense?
        
       | xlii wrote:
       | > 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 wrote:
       | > 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.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-09 23:01 UTC)