Greptile

The honest pitch for Greptile is that it reads your repository, not your diff. Most AI reviewers comment on the lines you touched; Greptile builds a graph of files, functions, and dependencies and has a swarm of agents judge the blast radius. We'd reach for it on the PRs that scare you — the shared utility change, the migration, the refactor nobody wants to review at 6pm. TREX is the part worth paying attention to. Static reviewers reason about code; TREX writes and runs tests in a sandbox and hands back logs and screenshots. Greptile claims that execution layer catches 20% more bugs, and runtime failures are exactly the class static analysis misses. It's still public beta, so treat the evidence trail as promising rather than proven on your stack. Where it bites: credits. A standard review costs 1 credit, a TREX review 3, and overages run $1 each. Fifty credits per seat looks generous until TREX becomes the default habit. To Greptile's credit, you can now set a dollar cap on additional review spend, which removes the billing-surprise problem that used to be the sharpest complaint here. Coverage is solid on Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Go, Elixir, Java, C, C++, C#, Swift, PHP, and Rust. Niche stacks get lower-quality responses, so Kotlin- or Scala-heavy shops should trial before committing. Solo devs and projects without formal review culture won't get much from it either. The closest alternative is CodeRabbit, which is cheaper and fine for straightforward review. Greptile costs more because it does more, and the gap widens if your team runs coding agents in production — the MCP connector, Claude Code plugin, and /greploop turn review into a loop an agent can close on its own rather than a comment thread a human has to shepherd. Our call: pick Greptile if you