AI Engineering Review PlatformBetaChat live

AI writes more code. Critique makes it safe to merge.

Critique is a GitHub-native AI code review control plane. Try Critique Chat in the browser right now — no install needed. Wire in the GitHub App when you want automated PR review.

Chat live · GitHub App beta · JS/TS-first review · Remedy on roadmap

Critique Chat

Repo-grounded chat in the browser — pick a model, ask questions, connect GitHub when you want full workspace context.

Repo-aware review

Reads the diff, related files, tests, and ownership map before it comments.

Parallel specialists

Spawns security, billing, and performance lanes only when the PR actually touches them.

Shared evidence board

Every agent writes to the same investigation layer so the final review compounds.

Roadmap: execution

Remedy and BYOA stay on the roadmap. The current beta ships the review gate, evidence pack, and GitHub output first.

CR_Chat — Live now

Ask anything
about the code.

Critique Chat is a multi-model, repo-aware chat interface that lives inside the product. No install, no waitlist — open it now and start asking questions about any public repo, or sign in to connect your own.

  1. 01Switch models per question — no config changes needed.
  2. 02Connect a GitHub repo and get file-grounded answers, not guesses.
  3. 03Sign in optional — start asking from the browser right now.
  4. 04No rate-limit on the free tier to start. Upgrade when you want more.
StepfunStepFun-3.5 FlashOpenAIGPT-5.4-MiniZ.aiGLM-5-TurboGrokGrok-4.2
What changed in the payments module since the last 3 commits?
U
Stepfun
StepFun-3.5 Flashrepo-grounded
4 files changed in the last 3 commits:
stripe/webhooks.ts +31 −4
Idempotency key check added on L112.
No test covers the retry path yet.
billing/invoice.ts +14 −18
Double-charge edge case resolved via
early-return before ledger write.
types/plans.ts +2 −0
ProAnnual enum member introduced.
Downstream pricing.ts reads it but
the mapping is not yet complete.
Streaming
Ask a follow-up...

Code generation accelerated. Review quality did not.

AI can write features, boilerplate, tests, and migrations faster than ever. But merging faster code safely requires a deeper review layer — one that understands architecture, tests, security boundaries, and downstream impact.

Core system

Not a single model pass.
A coordinated review system.

Scout maps context, specialists investigate in parallel, and Lead Reviewer makes the final merge decision.

01

Scout

Maps files, dependencies, tests, call sites, impact zones.

02

Shared Board

Creates a live evidence and task layer for all agents.

03

Specialists in Parallel

Security, tests, architecture, performance, docs.

04

Lead Reviewer

Synthesises findings, removes noise, makes final verdict.

05

Remedy / BYOA

Turns the review into execution.

Shared Investigation Board

Agents shouldn't review in isolation.

Scout turns the PR into a shared investigation space. Tasks, evidence, context, and follow-up questions are posted to a common board so specialists can coordinate, not duplicate work.

Evidence node
Auth issue task
Test gap task
Dependency impact task
Architecture concern task
Lead Reviewer consuming
Product surfaces

One review system.
Multiple engineering surfaces.

From security and tests to architecture, performance, and autonomous fix — each surface is a clear module you can rely on.

CR_ChatLive

Critique Chat

Try multi-model, repo-aware chat in the product — no install required to start. Connect GitHub when you want live code context and usage limits that match your plan.

Open Chat
CR_Security

Security Review

Catches auth bypasses, permission gaps, secret exposure, unsafe data access, and boundary regressions.

CR_Testing

Test Coverage Review

Finds missing tests, weakened assertions, untested pricing or billing paths, and regression risk.

CR_Architecture

Architecture Review

Flags layering violations, hidden dependency drift, incorrect abstractions, and risky structural changes.

CR_Performance

Performance Review

Detects N+1 queries, repeated fetch patterns, wasteful loops, and scalability concerns.

CR_Remedy

Remedy

Turns findings into code changes, runs verification, and pushes fixes automatically.

CR_BYOA

Bring Your Own Agent

Send Critique's structured fix blueprint to Codex, Claude Code, Copilot, or any external agent workflow.

How it gets made

A simple animated line
from repo to review.

Scout

Scout takes the repo

It reads the diff, nearby files, and tests first, then decides what actually deserves deeper review.

18 files changed43 related reads11 tool passes
Sample output

A review UI that actually shows
how the system thinks, searches, and decides.

This example walks through the full flow: Scout reads the repo, specialists are created with named models, tool usage is exposed, and the final review stays technical enough to be acted on instead of being dismissed as generic AI commentary.

Review session
github.com/acme/workspace-platform
FAIL
Active change
Unify workspace invites with seat billing reconciliation
PR #842 · feat/invite-seat-reconciliation · 2m 41s
Changed files
18
API, billing, workers, tests
Related files read
43
call sites, migrations, ownership, tests
Agents created
6
Scout, 4 specialists, Lead Reviewer
Tool passes
11
search, policies, graph, tests, schema
Tool usage
Semantic grep
Auth guards, workspace authority, invite handlers
Branch graph
Call sites and import edges around billing mutations
Policy replay
Route-level auth and tenant boundary checks
Test impact
Specs touched by invite, seat, and webhook changes
Schema diff
Migration and index changes in invite tables
Patch handoff
Structured fix plan for Remedy or external agents
Investigation log
00:04
Scout expands the PR beyond the diff
Mapped 18 changed files to 43 adjacent files, including invite routes, billing actions, workers, and failure-prone tests.
00:07
Security specialist spawned
Route authority shifted from URL params to request body, so the auth lane was escalated immediately.
00:09
Billing specialist spawned
Seat reconciliation helper stopped carrying an idempotency token through Stripe mutation retries.
00:14
Performance specialist spawned
Context graph builder introduced sequential reads in the hottest review path.
00:19
Lead Reviewer began synthesis
Consensus reached after 14 evidence notes and 3 corroborated findings landed on the shared board.
Critique review board
Unify workspace invites with seat billing reconciliation
github.com/acme/workspace-platform · PR #842 · verdict FAIL · confidence 96%
Live boardNamed modelsTechnical reviewFix export
Live agent activity

This is the real-time surface: Scout reads the repo, creates specialists only where the diff demands it, records tool usage, and waits for evidence before the lead model writes the review.

Shared investigation board
Scout has already framed the review problem before specialists open files.

Reads the diff first, then builds the context envelope needed for specialist review.

ClaudeClaude Sonnet 4.6
Evidence seeded
43 related files · 14 evidence notes seeded
Spawned 00:07
Security
OpenAI
Tenant boundaries
Examines route authority, policy helpers, and request validation in the invite flow.
policy replayroute traceschema validation diff
1 critical finding · 3 route guard mismatches
Spawned 00:09
Billing
Google
Seat sync
Compares the new seat reconciliation action against webhook retries and proration semantics.
mutation tracewebhook difftest coverage scan
1 high finding · 2 missing retry guards
Spawned 00:14
Performance
DeepSeek
Context graph latency
Measures review-path query serialization and cost spikes in the context graph builder.
trace timingsquery mapimport graph
1 medium finding · 54 reads serialized
Lead synthesis
Lead Reviewer starts only after evidence converges.
OpenAIGPT-5.4

Final synthesis blocks merge because the tenant boundary regression is externally reachable, the Stripe mutation can apply twice on retry, and the context graph builder now serializes 54 reads in the hot path.

Tool bursts
Semantic grep
Auth guards, workspace authority, invite handlers
Branch graph
Call sites and import edges around billing mutations
Policy replay
Route-level auth and tenant boundary checks
Test impact
Specs touched by invite, seat, and webhook changes
Schema diff
Migration and index changes in invite tables
Patch handoff
Structured fix plan for Remedy or external agents
Findings snapshot
Criticalcorroborated
Route authority regressed from URL-bound workspace scope to request-body scope
Highcorroborated
Seat reconciliation mutation can apply twice when the server action retries
Mediumcorroborated
Context graph builder serializes expensive reads in the hottest review path
Remedy

Most tools stop at comments. Critique closes the loop.

When Critique finds a missing test, architecture violation, or logic flaw, Remedy can patch the code, verify the result, and push a working fix directly to the branch.

  1. 1Boot isolated sandbox
  2. 2Pull repo + findings
  3. 3Write patch
  4. 4Run tests, lint, build
  5. 5Push verified fix

Or hand the blueprint to your own coding agent.

How Remedy works · Credit economics

Isolated sandbox
testslintbuild
Capped loop count · Verified before push
Why teams choose Critique

Not all AI review is the same.

The difference is not whether a model can comment. It is whether the system understands the repo, coordinates evidence, and gives engineers something they can trust enough to merge or act on.

Typical AI PR reviewer

  • Reads the diff only
  • Single model output
  • Limited architectural context
  • Can comment, but not execute
  • Weak cost control
  • Little policy flexibility

Critique

  • Repository-aware scouting
  • Parallel specialist agents
  • Shared evidence coordination
  • Final lead reasoning layer
  • Autonomous fix or BYOA execution
  • Flexible model routing and credit control
Policy & controls

Strict where it matters. Flexible where it doesn't.

  • ·Require deeper review on auth or billing code
  • ·Escalate security agents on protected directories
  • ·Tune strictness by repo or branch
  • ·Choose lead model and specialist stack (Standard & Pro: same catalog)
  • ·Route routine PRs to lighter models; save frontier models for when it matters
  • ·Ultra: GPT-5.2 Pro, GPT-5.4 Pro, Claude Opus 4.6, and any lead as a sub-agent
Economics

Credits follow the work — not a single flat rate.

Specialist sub-agents handle narrow inspection tasks; the lead model synthesises the verdict. Standard and Pro ship the same selectable catalog — Ultra adds GPT-5.2 Pro, GPT-5.4 Pro, and Claude Opus 4.6 — so you scale with credits instead of surprise routing.

Built for

Built for teams shipping in the age of generated code.

AI-heavy product teams

Review the flood of generated code with more than a single diff pass.

Engineering leads

Catch structural regressions, missing tests, and security drift before merge.

Startups moving fast

Add deep review without building internal agent infrastructure.

Teams with existing coding agents

Keep Codex, Claude Code, or Copilot for execution and let Critique own review quality.

Powered by the best models

Standard and Pro share one catalog; Ultra adds GPT-5.2 Pro, GPT-5.4 Pro, and Claude Opus 4.6 — or let Critique route for you.

OpenAI
Claude
Qwen
Z.ai
Built on proven infrastructure

Every component you trust, already integrated.

System credibility

GitHub-nativeIsolated sandboxesPolicy controlsModel flexibilityStructured evidenceNo local setup
Plans

Simple, transparent
pricing.

Standard
$12/mo
  • — 500 credits / month
  • — Full lead & specialist catalog (same as Pro)
  • — GitHub check runs
  • — Dashboard access
Get started
Pro
$35/mo
  • — 2,000 credits / month
  • — Same model catalog as Standard
  • — Fix proposal agent
  • — 7-day free trial
Start free trial
Ultra
$129/mo
  • — 10,000 credits / month
  • — GPT-5.2 Pro, GPT-5.4 Pro, Claude Opus 4.6 (Ultra-only)
  • — Same lead ↔ sub flexibility as Standard / Pro, plus frontier models
  • — Org-wide tooling
  • — Priority support
Sign up
Open Source Student Deal
Same entry credit pool as Standard, routed through a curated low-cost lane (e.g. GLM-5, Kimi K2.5, MiniMax M2.7) and efficient sub-agents — not the full public catalog. Starts at $5/mo, or $2.50/mo on the annual plan.
See student offer

Start reviewing before code ships.

Critique Chat is in the product today. GitHub installs, review runs, and policy controls ship alongside it; deeper repair automation stays on the roadmap.