CodeBeavervsrevmux
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
CodeBeaver
CodeBeaver · Code review agent
#256OSS
Panel
4.93 spec wins
- Reliability
- 4.7
- Usefulness
- 5.7
- Cost
- 5.5
- Longevity
- 3.7
“It writes the tests, runs the tests and explains the tests, leaving you only the job of trusting the tests.”
revmux
umputun · Code review agent
#227OSS
Panel
5.63 spec wins
- Reliability
- 5.8
- Usefulness
- 5.3
- Cost
- 6.3
- Longevity
- 5.0
“It is built to be run by your coding agent rather than by you, which is the first tool here honest about who its actual user is.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | CodeBeaver | revmux |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Code review agent | Code review agent |
| Runs | cloud, local | local |
| Platforms | macos, linux, web | macos, linux |
| Context window | not documented | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | No | No |
| MCP server | No | No |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-file edits | Yes | Norevmux deliberately never modifies source; it only reads the context handed to it and returns findings. |
| Git operations | Yes | No |
| Browser control | YesEnd-to-end tests drive a local Chrome from natural-language steps in codebeaver.yaml. | No |
| Sandboxed execution | No | No |
| Multi-agent orchestration | No | Yes |
| Headless / CI mode | Yes | Yes |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | OpenAI GPT | Claude Code, Codex |
| Bring your own model | No | Yes |
| Local models | No | No |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | mixed | byok |
| Starts at | n/a | $0/mo |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Bring your own key | Yes | Yes |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| GitHub stars | 33 | 93 |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | CodeBeaver | revmux | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 5.5 | 6.0 | revmux — Pick it when the thing you want reviewed is a plan or a proposal rather than code; pick a normal review bot when it is a pull request and nothing else. |
| El Crítico | 5.0 | 5.5 | revmux — It performs no scope detection and fetches nothing itself, so the review is entirely a function of the context whoever called it happened to write to disk. |
| El Profesor | 5.3 | 6.3 | revmux — The triage profile runs a four-way panel over an issue and returns the arguments rather than a verdict, declining to average away the disagreement. |
| La Inversora | 4.0 | 5.0 | revmux — 67 stars, no measured adoption, one maintainer, and a deliberately tiny tool with no service, account or edition anywhere near it. |
| La Jefa | 4.3 | 5.0 | revmux — Findings come back on standard output as machine-readable structure, which makes it composable in a pipeline, and the row lists no installation method at all. |
| El Hacker | 5.3 | 6.0 | revmux — MIT and a Go binary that writes to standard output and modifies nothing, which is the most unix thing anyone has shipped in this category. |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.