Inspect
Entity-level code review for Git that scores each changed function and class by blast radius in about 6ms per commit.
Inspect is the sharpest free local risk gate in this category: 83.5% High/Critical recall on a 50-PR, 97-golden-comment benchmark set, 100% recall at the Medium threshold, in 6ms with zero API calls. The graph-centric scoring rewrite (dependents and blast radius as primary signals) is what makes it credible — static structure beats LLM language understanding for ranking risk. Wrong pick if you need a review UI, inline PR comments, or a hosted service.
Verified 7h ago · liveness 65/100 · cite: rightaichoice.com/tools/inspect
- Engineering teams on large repos where a small diff to a public API can break many dependents
- CI pipelines that need a fast, free, local risk gate before merge
- AI coding agents that need entity-level triage to decide what to review first
- Security-conscious or regulated teams that can't send source code to a third-party service
- Teams that need a review dashboard, inline PR comments, or threaded collaboration
- Workflows that depend on a chat-style review bot posting inside the pull request
- Very small repos where reading the full diff is already faster
We scan live Reddit threads, YouTube comments, X posts, G2 reviews and other communities — and hand you an honest verdict in under a minute.
- Honest verdict, not marketing
- Real pros & cons from real users
- Attributed quotes with receipts
3 free scans · no card needed
Skip Inspect if your team needs a hosted review dashboard with inline PR comments and threaded discussion, or if you expect LLM review to run by default rather than as an opt-in pass that uses your own API key.
The LLM review path needs your own Anthropic or OpenAI API key, so token spend lands on your bill rather than a flat subscription — a single 85k-input-token review is billed to you.
The CLI, MCP server, and four-phase pipeline are free and run entirely on your machine with no network calls, which puts Inspect's core at a lower cost than per-seat AI reviewers like CodeRabbit and Greptile. Teams already paying for a chat-based reviewer can add Inspect as a free pre-filter rather than a replacement. The paid surface, if any, sits on the optional hosted HTTP API rather than on the triage signal itself.
In short
Inspect — Entity-level code review for Git that scores each changed function and class by blast radius in about 6ms per commit. Best for Engineering teams on large repos where a small diff to a public API can break many dependents, CI pipelines that need a fast, free, local risk gate before merge, AI coding agents that need entity-level triage to decide what to review first. Free to use.
What's new in Inspect
Checked 9 days agoAcross the latest 4 updates: 2 feature updates, 1 changelog entry and 1 news mention.
Parallel graph building for large codebases
Parallel graph building added to support large codebases, improving performance on repos beyond small ones like sem and weave.
Graph-centric risk scoring rewrite
Risk scoring now prioritizes dependents and blast radius, lifting AACR-Bench HC recall from ~30% to 48.3% and cutting false positives.
Greptile benchmark 83.5% HC recall
On 50 PRs, 5 repos, and 97 golden comments, Inspect reached 83.5% High/Critical recall and 100% recall at the Medium threshold, beating Augment, Greptile, CodeRabbit, Cursor, and Copilot.
MCP server, review verdict, markdown formatter
New inspect-mcp crate with 6 MCP tools for coding agents, a four-level ReviewVerdict signal, --format markdown for all commands, and cached analysis to avoid re-running the 4-phase pipeline.
What people actually say about Inspect — is it worth it?
We ran a structured research pass across product reviews, community discussions, and post-purchase forum threads to surface the patterns vendors won't publish themselves. Below: the recurring strengths, the hidden costs people mention most, and the cohort that consistently regrets adopting this tool.
124 mentions across 8 sources (Hacker News, YouTube, Product Hunt, App Store, Bluesky, Stack Overflow, GitHub, Lemmy) · researched Jul 6, 2026.
Average across the 8 sources that answered — each source counts once, not each post.
- +Local execution with no API calls for core triage.
- +Entity-level diff analysis highlights structurally risky changes.
- +Graph-centric risk scoring based on dependents and blast radius.
- +Supports 21 languages plus 5 data formats via tree-sitter.
- +95% recall on planted bugs benchmark with zero LLM calls.
- −Very few direct user reviews or community discussions.
- −App Store version has severe bugs and sync issues.
- −No cloud version; requires local setup for CI pipelines.
- −Core signal from dependency graph, not deep code understanding.
- −Lack of integration with popular CI/CD platforms like GitHub Actions.
- • LLM review requires you to bring your own API key for Anthropic, OpenAI, or Ollama.
Viability Score
How well maintained and how widely used is Inspect? Built from what the vendor actually publishes (docs, changelog, tutorials, integrations, pricing), whether the site is live, and how much real users discuss it. How we calculate this
Last calculated: October 2026
How we score →Key Features
- Entity-level diff analysis: parses changed functions, classes, methods, structs, and enums, not just files and lines
- Graph-centric risk scoring with dependents and blast radius as the primary signals
- Change classification: text (comments), syntax (signatures), functional (logic), or mixed
- Union-Find grouping that untangles commits mixing independent logical changes
- Four-phase pipeline (Extract, Classify, Score, Group) runs fully local with 0 API calls
- Optional LLM review of top entities via Anthropic, OpenAI, or any OpenAI-compatible server
- Local Ollama support with no API key for air-gapped or regulated environments
- MCP server (inspect-mcp crate) with 6 tools for coding agents
- ReviewVerdict output with four levels: LikelyApprovable, StandardReview, RequiresReview, RequiresCarefulReview
- Markdown and JSON output formats available for all commands via --format
- Analysis caching keyed by repo and target so repeat runs and drill-downs skip the 4-phase pipeline
- Parallel graph building for large codebases
- Installable via Homebrew tap or cargo install from GitHub
- Entity extraction for 21 languages including Rust, TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Java, C, C++, C#, Ruby, PHP,
- inspect bench command for benchmarking entity-level review across a repo's commit history
About Inspect
Inspect is a local CLI that answers one narrow question well: of the eight files in this diff, which two actually deserve careful review? It parses a Git diff into entities — functions, classes, methods, structs, enums — using tree-sitter and sem-core, then builds a full-repo dependency graph and scores every changed entity by dependent count and blast radius. A change to a public API with 12 dependents and a blast radius of 171 lands as CRITICAL; a comment tweak stays LOW. Verdicts come back in roughly 6ms per commit, entirely on your machine. The four-phase pipeline (Extract, Classify, Score, Group) runs with no LLM and no network calls, so core triage costs nothing and nothing leaves your repo. Classification separates text (comments), syntax (signatures), functional (logic), and mixed changes, while Union-Find grouping untangles commits that mix unrelated logical changes so they can be reviewed separately. Extraction covers 21 languages plus 5 data formats, and output goes to terminal, JSON, or markdown via --format. If you want deeper review you can optionally route top entities to Anthropic, OpenAI, or any OpenAI-compatible server including local Ollama — that is opt-in, not the default path. An inspect-mcp crate exposes 6 MCP tools so coding agents can query entity-level triage directly. Analysis caching keyed by repo and target means repeat runs and drill-downs skip the pipeline entirely, and parallel graph building keeps large codebases from bogging down. Install via Homebrew tap or cargo install from GitHub. It is built for developers and engineering teams who live in the terminal and CI. What it is not: a review platform — no dashboard, no comment threads, no hosted collaboration. CodeRabbit and Greptile sell the PR-conversation workflow; Inspect sells the ranked signal that tells you where to spend attention.
Behind the Verdict
Reviewers do not fail because they cannot read code. They fail because a 400-line diff spends attention evenly, and the one-line signature change with 12 dependents hides in the middle of it. Inspect attacks exactly that problem, and nothing else. We'd reach for this when a repo is big enough that "just read the diff" stopped working. The blast-radius score is the whole product: a public API change with 171 downstream entities surfaces as CRITICAL, and the six files around it get dismissed in the same breath. That ranking is structural, not probabilistic, so it does not hallucinate a scary verdict for a comment edit. The classification and Union-Find grouping matter more than they look on the feature list. Tangled commits — one refactor plus one unrelated config tweak — get split into independently reviewable units, which is the part a plain diff viewer never solves. Where it bites: there is no dashboard, no inline PR comments, no threaded collaboration. If your team's review workflow lives inside a hosted bot that chats in the pull request, Inspect is a parallel tool, not a replacement. The LLM review path is opt-in and needs your own credentials (or local Ollama), so teams expecting an out-of-the-box AI reviewer will be surprised — the default answer is arithmetic, not a language model. Against alternatives: CodeRabbit and Greptile sell the conversation layer, and their benchmark numbers on the same planted-bug set came in well below Inspect's High/Critical recall. If you need a chat bot in the PR, buy that. If you need to know which two files matter before the bot weighs in, run Inspect first. Air-gapped and regulated teams should pay attention to the zero-network default. Core triage works with no API key at all, and Ollama support means even the optional deep
Researching Inspect? Get your full AI stack in 60 seconds.
Free, no signup — tell us your goal and get tools matched to your budget & existing stack.
Real-world workflow fit
Concrete scenarios for the personas Inspect actually fits — and what changes day-one when you adopt it.
Add `inspect diff HEAD~1 --format json --min-risk high` to the CI pipeline and fail the job when the verdict is RequiresCarefulReview.
Outcome: Reviewers get a ranked list of the two entities that matter instead of scrolling eight files, and the gate costs no API spend and adds milliseconds to the build.
Point the agent at the inspect-mcp crate so it calls inspect_triage first, then inspect_entity to drill into the riskiest function with before/after content and dependents.
Outcome: The agent spends its context on the entity with 12 dependents instead of the comment-only changes, and cached ReviewResult makes the follow-up drill-down instant.
Run `inspect review HEAD~1 --provider ollama --model llama3` against a local model, with no API key and no code leaving the network.
Outcome: High-risk entities still get an LLM pass while source code never touches a third-party endpoint.
Use Cases
- Triage every pull request in CI by running `inspect diff HEAD~1` and gating merges on critical entities
- Identify which changed functions have many dependents before merging to production
- Run `inspect bench` on your monorepo to measure how often risky changes slip through review
- Use the MCP server to give AI coding agents entity-level risk awareness during automated PR reviews
- Combine inspect with a local Ollama model for air-gapped code review without sending code to any cloud
- Untangle a large commit that mixes auth, caching, and logging changes into separately reviewable groups
- Filter to only High and Critical entities with --min-risk high so reviewers see the signal, not the noise
Models Under the Hood
as of 2026-09-23
Limitations
- Inspect is a CLI tool, so it is not suited for non-technical users.
- The core triage runs locally with no LLM or network calls, but the optional LLM review requires an API key or a local server such as Ollama, and by default sends up to 10 entities at High risk or above.
- Benchmark recall varies by language and repo (e.g., 100% on Keycloak (Java), 67% on Sentry (Python)); the benchmark is small (50 PRs, 5 repos, 97 golden comments).
as of 2026-09-22
Verification history
We have re-verified Inspect 10 times since . Each pass re-reads the vendor's own pages and re-checks every listed field against that evidence; passes where nothing had changed are marked as such.
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
Showing the 6 most recent of 10 verification passes.
Free to cite with attribution — this page re-verifies continuously.
Where the pricing makes sense
The company stage and team size where Inspect's pricing actually pencils out — and where peers do it cheaper.
The CLI, MCP server, and four-phase pipeline are free and run entirely on your machine with no network calls, which puts Inspect's core at a lower cost than per-seat AI reviewers like CodeRabbit and Greptile. Teams already paying for a chat-based reviewer can add Inspect as a free pre-filter rather than a replacement. The paid surface, if any, sits on the optional hosted HTTP API rather than on the triage signal itself.
Setup time & first value
How long it actually takes to get something useful out of Inspect — broken out by persona, not the marketing-page minute.
For a developer already in a terminal: about 5 seconds — `brew install ataraxy-labs/tap/inspect` then `inspect diff HEAD~1`. For CI, budget a few minutes to add the install step and wire the exit code to your merge gate. For teams wiring the MCP server into a coding agent, add the inspect-mcp crate to the agent config; no key is needed for the local triage tools.
Switching to or from Inspect
How to bring data in from common predecessors and how to get it back out — written for the switcher, not the buyer.
- →From reading full diffs manually: run `inspect diff HEAD~1` and let the ranked verdict pick which two of eight files deserve a careful read.
- →From CodeRabbit or Greptile: keep your chat-based reviewer and add `inspect diff HEAD~1 --min-risk high` as a free local pre-filter before the bot comments.
- →From an LLM-only review bot: start with the local four-phase pipeline (0 API calls) and only add `inspect review` for the top entities once the graph signal has cut the noise.
- ↗To CodeRabbit or Greptile: if you need inline PR comments and a hosted dashboard, move the workflow layer there while keeping Inspect in CI as a free risk gate.
- ↗To manual review: Inspect is a single binary with no server to decommission — drop the CI step and the MCP config and you're back to `git diff`.
Resources & Guides
- Documentationinspect.ataraxy-labs.com
Docs · Inspect
Full product docs from inspect.ataraxy-labs.com
- Resourceinspect.ataraxy-labs.com
Benchmarks · Inspect
Helpful link from inspect.ataraxy-labs.com
- Resourceinspect.ataraxy-labs.com
Changelog · Inspect
Helpful link from inspect.ataraxy-labs.com
- Resourceinspect.ataraxy-labs.com
Llms · Inspect
Helpful link from inspect.ataraxy-labs.com
Tutorials & Learning
YouTube returned 6 videos for “Inspect”, and we withheld 6: 6 could not be judged, because “Inspect” is a single word that other videos use for other things. We are showing none, because we could not prove any of them are about Inspect.
Official links
Tools that pair well with Inspect
Common stack mates teams adopt alongside Inspect, with the specific reason each pairing earns its keep.
CodeBoarding
CodeBoarding draws architecture diagrams of your codebase so you can review a PR's blast radius, not just its diff.
GitHub Copilot
GitHub Copilot is an AI coding agent that completes code, reviews pull requests, and runs Copilot, Claude, and Codex agents inside GitHub
Augment Code
Cosmos is Augment Code's agent orchestration platform for running standing SDLC loops — review, ticket-to-PR, security remediation, and incident triage — with
Featured Head-to-Head Comparisons
Inspect vs Spider Cloud
If you need to pull structured web data at scale for AI pipelines, Spider Cloud is the clear pick with its Rust engine, 99.9% success rate, and flexible API. For teams drowning in noisy PRs who want to surface critical changes instantly, Inspect offers free, local, graph-based code triage that beats premium tools on recall. These tools solve completely different problems — choose Spider Cloud for external data ingestion, Inspect for internal code quality.
Inspect vs Temporal Ai
Temporal AI and Inspect serve completely different needs. Temporal is for building reliable, durable workflows and AI agents that survive failures, while Inspect is a code review triage tool that highlights structurally risky changes in milliseconds. If your pain point is unreliable agent execution or complex microservice orchestration, choose Temporal. If you're drowning in noisy PR diffs and want entity-level risk scoring, choose Inspect. They are complementary, not competitive.
Inspect vs Voyage Ai
Choose Voyage AI if your priority is high-accuracy retrieval on domain-specific documents (finance, legal) and you need long-context, low-dimensional embeddings for cost-efficient vector storage at enterprise scale. Choose Inspect if you are an engineering team struggling with noisy code reviews and want free, local, graph-based risk triage for pull requests — especially if you already use GitHub and want to integrate with AI agents via MCP.
Alternatives to Inspect
View all
CodeBoarding
CodeBoarding draws architecture diagrams of your codebase so you can review a PR's blast radius, not just its diff.
GitHub Copilot
GitHub Copilot is an AI coding agent that completes code, reviews pull requests, and runs Copilot, Claude, and Codex agents inside GitHub
Augment Code
Cosmos is Augment Code's agent orchestration platform for running standing SDLC loops — review, ticket-to-PR, security remediation, and incident triage — with
Frequently Asked Questions
Categories
Used Inspect? Help shape our editorial sentiment research.