> Runs against your regular Claude Code subscription (Max plan recommended) — unlike /ultrareview, which charges against your Extra Usage pool.
How expensive is it to run in your experience? In $ or tokens?
The best code review improvement I have done in my workflow with Claude is using tuicr (
https://tuicr.dev).
It runs locally, YOU review all the code locally, and feedback that to Claude.
Agents reviewing AI code always felt dirty to me, especially when working on production (non-disposable) code.
Great project! I’ve build something similar, not very clean and polished, but focussed around deterministic orchestration of multiple agents via typescript, because a coordinating agent was notoriously bad at things such as fetching relevant tickets and other context. One thing I struggle with so far, though, are the actual instructions for the review themselves. They are either too vague, leading to superficial or overly broad reviews, or too specific and thus not applicable to different kinds of PRs…
We seem to be fighting complexity with complexity. Does it really help?
"I pay Claude, to use Claude, to write instructions for Claude, to review code from Claude"
Have we all just given up?
Holy vibe coding batman this looks like a repository with just a bazillion prompts of which there are already a million.
Seems like it would create a lot of friction and burn a lot of tokens.
That's looks like a fair bit of ceremony for what it does. Is this representative of the output?
https://github.com/adamjgmiller/adamsreview/pull/3