AsyncReviewvsLaReview
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
AsyncReview
AsyncFunc AI · Code review agent
#234OSS
Panel
5.92 spec wins
- Reliability
- 5.5
- Usefulness
- 5.8
- Cost
- 7.8
- Longevity
- 4.3
“It reviews issues as well as pull requests, so it can now explain that your bug report was also wrong.”
LaReview
puemos · Code review agent
#183OSS
Panel
6.12 spec wins
- Reliability
- 5.5
- Usefulness
- 6.0
- Cost
- 8.0
- Longevity
- 5.0
“It draws a heatmap of which files are riskiest, for teams who found git blame insufficiently confrontational.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | AsyncReview | LaReview |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Code review agent | Code review agent |
| Runs | local, sandbox | local |
| Platforms | macos, linux, windows | macos, linux |
| Context window | not documented | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | No | No |
| MCP server | No | No |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | YesThe agent writes and runs Python inside a REPL sandbox to verify findings, rather than executing shell commands in your repository. | Yes |
| Multi-file edits | No | No |
| Git operations | YesIt reads pull requests and issues through the GitHub API; the README documents no commit or branch operations. | Yes |
| Browser control | No | No |
| Sandboxed execution | No | No |
| Multi-agent orchestration | No | YesLaReview drives the coding agent you select; the review reasoning runs in that agent, not in LaReview itself. |
| Headless / CI mode | Yes | No |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | Gemini | Claude Code, coding agents |
| Bring your own model | NoGEMINI_API_KEY is the documented credential; no other provider is named. | Yes |
| Local models | No | No |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | byok | byok |
| Starts at | $0/mo | $0/mo |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Bring your own key | Yes | Yes |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| GitHub stars | 459 | 182 |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | AsyncReview | LaReview | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 6.0 | 7.0 | LaReview — Pick this when large pull requests are the bottleneck and you already pay for a coding agent; pick a hosted review bot if you want it to run without you. |
| El Crítico | 5.8 | 6.0 | LaReview — The row states that review reasoning runs in whichever coding agent you selected, not in LaReview, so the quality of a review is a property of your configuration. |
| El Profesor | 6.5 | 6.0 | AsyncReview — The loop plans, emits code, executes it, observes and repeats, which grounds every finding in a value the agent actually retrieved rather than one it recalled. |
| La Inversora | 5.3 | 5.3 | no preference |
| La Jefa | 5.5 | 6.0 | LaReview — Nothing per seat for sixty engineers, feedback lands back in the forge we already use, and team rules mean standards are a file rather than a tradition. |
| El Hacker | 6.3 | 6.5 | LaReview — MIT, a prebuilt binary rather than a package manager, and linked local repositories mean the code search happens on my disk even though the inference does not. |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.