We've had great success with a custom gh action on a self hosted runner. It sets up codex and all the same stuff a dev has on their machine:

So dbs, seed files, etc, and then just a review prompt and some skills and a few scripts.

It triggers on a new published PR or if tagged @bot-name. It's way better than the other services we've tried (which was admittedly ages ago) because you can get it to work exactly how you want it and it's dead simple.

With Codex, for the time being at least, you can use a subscription, so it's basically free if you're already paying for one. But on API pricing it's still not too bad as it doesn't produce that much output.

I set this all up in about half a day. Codex does 99% of the heavy lifting.

I've set up a claude code on a vm with a bunch of skills that can use git and the Azure Dev Ops MCP via a service user, the regular build agent pops a record in a db that serves as a queue/review and a bash script picks things up and fires off claude code in headless mode.

It's pretty effective and lets you do nice stuff like compare the code to the tickets, reply to comments and stuff like that.

Using a different lab's model to review the code to the one that wrote it. Claude model plans/codes, OpenAI model reviews, or vice versa, or DeepSeek or GLM or whatever.

> the claude code review product originally mentioned it cost "$15-25 per review" (which is absurd)

If an engineer paid $150,000 a year reviews some code manually for about 30 minutes, the cost of their time is about $36.