CodeRabbit
AI code review for engineering teams. CodeRabbit reviews pull requests on GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps and Bitbucket, plus changes in the IDE and the terminal, combining line-by-line suggestions, 40+ linters and whole-repository context after a two-click install.
What is CodeRabbit?
CodeRabbit is an AI code review platform that its publisher positions as an independent control layer between code, written by people or by agents, and the merge. It works on three surfaces. On pull requests it reviews changes in GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps and Bitbucket. In the editor, a Visual Studio Code extension, also compatible with Cursor and Windsurf, reviews staged and unstaged work before commit. In the terminal, a CLI does the same and hands findings over to coding agents such as Claude Code, Codex CLI and Gemini. Sign-up goes through a GitHub or GitLab account and is advertised as a two-click install; a public repository needs no further configuration.
What separates it from a linter is how much context it gathers: a Codegraph of the repository, analysis of linked repositories, MCP servers, linked Jira or Linear issues and web queries. On top of that it wires in more than forty linters and security scanners and filters their false positives. Behaviour is configurable in a YAML file with path-specific instructions and AST-grep rules, and the bot stores preferences expressed in conversation as reusable Learnings.
Each review yields a summary, a walkthrough, an architecture or sequence diagram, line-by-line comments and committable suggestions. Pre-merge checks, built-in plus custom ones written in plain English on the higher tiers, turn that into a mergeability verdict with blockers. Finishing Touches generate docstrings and unit tests, apply autofixes, simplify code and resolve merge conflicts. Around the review sit an Issue Planner for Jira, Linear, GitHub Issues and GitLab, analytics dashboards, standup and sprint reports, and a Slack agent billed by the minute that investigates incidents, settles customer tickets and opens pull requests.
Reviews run on OpenAI and Anthropic APIs alongside other third-party providers. The company reports six million repositories, 75 million defects found, more than 15,000 customers and 150,000+ open source projects on the free offer, and claims first place for online F1 score in the independent Martian benchmark across roughly 300,000 pull requests. It also states its own limits: the tool catches 95%+ of bugs, and it is meant to complement human review rather than replace it.
What it does
- Review each pull request line by line, with one-click committable suggestions and a Fix with AI action on the harder findings.
- Post a summary, a walkthrough and an architecture or sequence diagram for every diff.
- Enforce pre-merge checks, including custom checks written in plain English, and surface the blockers that should stop a merge.
- Consolidate the output of more than forty linters and SAST scanners into one verdict, filtering false positives.
- Produce the missing pieces: docstrings, unit tests, autofixes, simplifications and merge conflict resolution.
- Review uncommitted work inside the IDE or the terminal, and orchestrate coding agents from the command line.
- Plan and report around the code: Issue Planner with Jira, Linear, GitHub Issues or GitLab, analytics dashboards, automated standup and sprint reports, and a Slack agent that investigates incidents, handles customer tickets and opens pull requests.
When to use CodeRabbit / When not to
A quick filter to help you decide if CodeRabbit is the right fit.
When to use CodeRabbit
- Engineering teams whose pull request volume has doubled or tripled since they put AI coding agents to work, and who now need a review gate in front of that flow.
- Open source maintainers: public repositories are reviewed free for life with no extra setup, and the vendor counts more than 150,000 OSS projects on that offer.
- Startups backed by a VC or an accelerator, which can take the Startup Program discount of 50% on Pro Plus for six months.
- Large organisations that buy on controls rather than features: SSO, custom RBAC, audit logging, self-hosting, an SLA, a dedicated CSM and an EU SaaS deployment.
- Engineering managers who want product analytics dashboards plus automated standup and sprint reports on top of the reviews themselves.
When not to use CodeRabbit
- Teams whose repositories are not hosted on GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps or Bitbucket: a connected third-party account is a prerequisite of the terms, so an isolated local version control system is out of scope.
- Anyone hoping to retire the human reviewer: the vendor describes the product as designed to complement, not replace, human review.
- Organisations that want to score people. The terms place HR decisions, individual performance evaluation and monitoring of individuals explicitly outside the intended use.
- Buyers who need a contractual support commitment and a localised product: the terms carry a No Support clause, free users are routed to the Discord community, and both the interface and the documentation exist in English only.
- Teams that need EU-only hosting, self-hosting or mobile access on a modest budget: servers are in the United States by default, EU deployment and self-hosting are Enterprise-tier, and there is no iOS or Android app.
How to use CodeRabbit
A typical end-to-end flow, from setup to results.
- Sign up on app.coderabbit.ai with a GitHub or GitLab account; the install is advertised as two clicks and asks for no credit card.
- Install the CodeRabbit app on the organisation, then authorise the repositories you want reviewed.
- On a public repository, stop there: no additional setup is required and reviews are free for life.
- Open a pull request and let the bot post its summary, walkthrough, diagram and line-by-line comments.
- Apply the committable suggestions in one click, or use Fix with AI on the more involved cases.
- Reply to the bot in the pull request to push back on a comment; the preference is recorded as a Learning and reused in later reviews.
- Commit a YAML configuration file at the repository root for guidelines, path-specific instructions, AST-grep rules and checks.
- Turn on the built-in pre-merge checks and, on Pro Plus or Enterprise, write custom checks in plain English.
- Install the VS Code extension, which also serves Cursor and Windsurf, or the CLI, to review before committing.
- Connect Jira or Linear, MCP servers and, optionally, the Slack agent, then follow the analytics dashboards and schedule the standup and sprint reports.
Pros & Cons
Pros
- Two-click install through a GitHub or GitLab account, with no additional configuration for public repositories.
- A genuinely free entry point: USD 0 per user per month with pull request summaries and IDE and CLI reviews, lifetime free reviews on public repositories, and a 14-day Pro Plus trial with no credit card.
- No cap on the number of pull requests reviewed or repositories connected, on any tier, and only developers who open pull requests are billed; seats can be reassigned at any time.
- Three review surfaces, pull request, IDE and terminal, plus a Slack agent, where most competing tools cover one.
- Unusually deep context and customisation: Codegraph, linked repositories, MCP, Jira and Linear issues, forty-plus linters and scanners, YAML rules, path instructions, AST-grep and learned preferences.
- Documented security posture: SOC 2 Type II audited annually, zero data retention once a review ends, storage opt-out, a public DPA and Article 27 representatives for the EU and the UK.
- An independently measured result, first for online F1 score in the Martian benchmark over roughly 300,000 pull requests, and named references including NVIDIA, the Linux Foundation, Swiggy, Visma, Clerk and Mastra.
Cons
- The terms include a No Support clause: there is no contractual obligation to provide support, and free users get only the Discord community.
- No backup obligation either, and the terms allow Customer Data to be deleted without notice.
- Hourly per-developer rate limits, five, ten and twelve pull request reviews per hour by tier, plus a fair usage policy on Pro and Pro Plus.
- Several key capabilities are gated: custom checks, unit test generation, Issue Planner and merge conflict resolution start at Pro Plus, while API access, self-hosting, SSO, custom RBAC, an SLA and EU deployment are Enterprise-only.
- The headline USD 24 price assumes an annual commitment; month to month costs USD 30, a quarter more.
- Open source projects are carved out of the no-training commitment: the privacy policy states that OSS is used to train the vendor's systems.
- Reviews depend on third-party model providers, OpenAI and Anthropic, with the terms disclaiming responsibility for third-party output quality; there is no mobile app and the interface is English only; and the Trust Center renders entirely in JavaScript, so its contents cannot be checked from the static page.
Pricing & Plans
A permanent free plan is available at USD 0 per user per month, covering unlimited public and private repositories with pull request summaries and reviews in the IDE and the CLI; public repositories are reviewed free of charge for life. A 14-day trial of Pro Plus is offered without a credit card. The cheapest paid entry point is the Pro plan at USD 24.00 per user per month on annual billing, or USD 30 per user per month billed monthly. Pro Plus costs USD 48 per user per month annually, or USD 60 monthly, and Enterprise pricing is quoted on request. Only developers who open pull requests are charged.
- unlimited public and private repositories
- pull request summaries
- reviews in the IDE and the CLI
- and a 14-day Pro Plus trial with no credit card required.
- linters and SAST
- Jira and Linear integrations
- agentic chat
- product analytics dashboards
- customisable reports
- docstring generation
- five MCP connections
- one linked repository analysis
- everything in Pro plus twenty custom pre-merge checks
- unit test generation
- simplify and merge conflict resolution
- Issue Planner
- fifteen MCP connections
- ten linked repository analyses and ten pull request reviews per developer per hour.
- everything in Pro Plus plus custom RBAC
- SSO
- audit logging
- API access
- an optional self-hosting deployment
- multi-org support
- an SLA
- technical enablement and a dedicated CSM
- credits bought one-off or as a monthly subscription.
- CodeRabbit Agent for Slack
- USD 0.50 per agent minute
- with only active execution time billed and no charge for cold starts or idle time.
Data, GDPR & hosting
A consolidated view of how CodeRabbit handles your data.
GDPR overview
CodeRabbit states GDPR compliance explicitly and backs it with named mechanisms. The privacy policy, effective 10 December 2025, positions the company as data controller for European residents and lists rights of access, rectification, erasure, objection, restriction and portability, with access requests answered within 30 days. Legal bases are spelled out: contractual necessity, legitimate interests and consent. Two Article 27 representatives are designated, Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH in Bonn for the European Union and Rickert Services Ltd UK in Peterborough for the United Kingdom, and a Data Protection Officer is reachable at privacy@coderabbit.ai. A Data Processing Agreement is published, carrying Standard Contractual Clauses, a UK addendum, Swiss provisions and a subprocessor list. Servers are in the United States; storage is claimed to meet SOC 2 Type II, GDPR and HIPAA. The site says it does not track visitors and honours Do Not Track.
Who owns the data?
Under the terms, the customer keeps all right, title and interest in its Customer Data, treated as the customer's Confidential Information along with its proprietary code and the review Output. CodeRabbit assigns to the customer whatever rights it holds in that Output, conditional on payment of all fees due; the assignment excludes output produced from other users' activity, and identical or similar output may go to other customers. CodeRabbit keeps all intellectual property in the service and takes ownership of any Feedback sent to it. It has no duty to back up Customer Data and may delete it without notice. Aggregated operating data belongs to the vendor but may not identify the customer, and personal data is neither sold nor shared for marketing.
Reuse rights
Review output can be reused without asking permission: summaries, walkthroughs, diagrams, suggested diffs, generated docstrings and unit tests may go straight into the customer's own codebase and products, because CodeRabbit assigns its rights in the Output to the customer. Three contractual limits apply. The assignment is conditional on payment of all amounts due, so an unpaid account weakens the claim. The licence to the service is worldwide, non-exclusive, non-sublicensable, non-transferable and restricted to the customer's internal use. And exclusivity is not promised: the same or similar output may be supplied to other customers, and the assignment does not cover output generated from other users' activity. On the input side, code is transmitted to third-party AI model providers, named as OpenAI and Anthropic, under a zero data retention policy, and neither they nor CodeRabbit train models on it. One carve-out is explicit: the privacy policy, effective 10 December 2025, states that open source projects are used to train CodeRabbit's systems. Vector embeddings are stored to personalise reviews and can be opted out of at any time. Any feedback sent to the vendor becomes the vendor's property.
Data retention & training
Hosting summary
The privacy policy states that CodeRabbit's servers are located in the United States and that using the service implies consent to that transfer. Enterprise customers can instead take an EU SaaS deployment or self-host. The address the domain resolves to belongs to Cloudflare, an anycast node attributed to San Francisco, which is a CDN front rather than a storage location. Named subprocessors include OpenAI and Anthropic for the reviews themselves, GitHub, GitLab, Jira and Linear on the repository and issue side, and Stripe, Chargebee and Mailchimp for payments, subscriptions and email; a full subprocessor list is published on the trust site and referenced from the Data Processing Agreement. For transfers out of Europe that agreement relies on Standard Contractual Clauses, a UK IDTA or addendum and Swiss provisions, with a clause allowing an alternative transfer mechanism. Security is described as physical, technical and organisational measures with access restricted to the employees who need it, end-to-end encryption during the review and zero data retention once it ends. Storage is claimed to meet SOC 2 Type II, GDPR and HIPAA requirements.
Things to keep in mind
Risks and trade-offs to weigh before adopting CodeRabbit.
- Delegated judgement. The publisher itself says the tool complements rather than replaces human review; leaning on it alone quietly erodes a team's habit of reading a diff critically.
- Over-trusting a headline number. Catching 95%+ of bugs is the vendor's own claim, and a residue of defects always survives, including the classes of problem no scanner is looking for.
- Proprietary code leaves your perimeter. Diffs are transmitted to third-party model providers, OpenAI and Anthropic, under zero data retention commitments you cannot audit yourself.
- Contributing in public feeds the vendor's models. Open source projects are explicitly excluded from the no-training commitment, so OSS code is used to train CodeRabbit's systems.
- Nothing guarantees your data persists, and nothing guarantees it is yours alone: the terms allow Customer Data to be deleted without notice and let identical or similar output go to other customers. Vector embeddings are stored by default and opting out is something you must ask for.
- Jurisdiction and misuse. Servers sit in the United States unless you buy the Enterprise tier, the stated minimum age is 13 for a tool that handles proprietary code, and the terms place performance evaluation, HR decisions and monitoring of individuals outside the intended use, a temptation worth naming out loud.
- Operational and financial exposure. The review pipeline now depends on a third party, so an incident at the vendor degrades it; hourly rate limits can stall a team at peak; and the Slack agent billed by the minute makes spending hard to forecast.
Setup & Integrations
Technical difficulty
Low in the standard case. Sign-up uses a GitHub or GitLab account, the install is advertised as two clicks, no card is required, and a public repository needs no additional setup: the bot comments straight into the pull request with nothing to install locally. Reviews in the editor or the terminal add one step: the VS Code extension or the CLI. Deeper customisation is optional: YAML configuration, path-specific instructions and AST-grep rules. Enterprise deployments, with SSO, RBAC, self-hosting and custom setup, need a platform team. The one hard prerequisite is a repository hosted on GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps or Bitbucket.
Deployment
Integrations
Supported languages
Behind CodeRabbit
Fundraising
Social
Resources
All the official URLs gathered for verification and reference.
Alternatives
Tools that compete with or complement CodeRabbit.
Frequently asked questions
What is CodeRabbit?
Is there a free plan, and is there a trial?
How much do the paid plans cost?
Who gets billed, and are there usage limits?
Which programming languages does it handle?
Is my source code stored, and is it used to train models?
What compliance evidence does CodeRabbit publish?
Where is data hosted, and can the tool be self-hosted?
How does it differ from GitHub Copilot, and what does the CLI add?
What support is offered, and is there a minimum age?
Should you pick CodeRabbit?
CodeRabbit is an established product rather than an experiment: the domain dates from April 2023, the site was first archived in July 2023, the company has raised USD 88 million and claims more than 15,000 customers. Its positioning is clear and it is not the usual one. Instead of writing code, it sits between the code produced, by a person or by an agent, and the merge, and it covers three surfaces at once, the pull request, the IDE and the terminal, plus a Slack agent for the wider software lifecycle. The context it pulls in, a repository Codegraph, linked repositories, MCP servers, issue trackers and more than forty linters and security scanners, is what makes the difference against a plain linter, and the customisation layer of YAML rules, path instructions and learned preferences is deeper than most.
The commercial model is legible: a permanent free plan, open source reviewed free for life, USD 24 per user per month on an annual commitment, and billing limited to the developers who actually open pull requests. The security posture is documented rather than merely asserted, with an annual SOC 2 Type II audit, a public DPA, Article 27 representatives in the EU and the UK and a storage opt-out.
The reservations are real too. Support is contractually disclaimed. EU hosting and self-hosting are reserved for the Enterprise tier. Open source contributions are explicitly excluded from the no-training commitment. Hourly review limits apply per developer, and everything is in English. The one quality claim measured by a third party, first place for online F1 score in the Martian benchmark across roughly 300,000 pull requests, is encouraging, and the publisher itself is careful to say the tool complements human review rather than replacing it. That caveat is worth taking at face value.
- Choosing a selection results in a full page refresh.
- Opens in a new window.