Source: https://codereviewguide.fyi/greptile-alternatives-uncommitted-code/

# Greptile alternatives for reviewing uncommitted code

Perch checks a saved English requirement against the working file before you commit. CodeRabbit reviews staged and tracked uncommitted changes, and Macroscope includes work in progress in a frozen branch snapshot. Greptile's documented CLI reviews committed branch changes and ignores uncommitted edits.

Which version of the code does the command inspect?

| Tool | Uncommitted input | Useful review unit | Workflow source |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Perch | The current working file. A file::method target selects one method. | One named English requirement, or the applicable saved rules at project, file and method scope. | [Working-file and method checks](https://github.com/lakeday-org/perch/blob/main/docs/check.md) |
| CodeRabbit | `--uncommitted` selects staged and tracked local edits. `--include-untracked` adds files not yet tracked by Git. | A local Git review with repository configuration and findings for a coding agent. | [CLI flags and local review](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/cli) |
| Macroscope | A frozen branch snapshot including work in progress, isolated in a temporary worktree by default. | A branch review, with agent commands for review and a bounded repair loop. | [Snapshot and agent workflow](https://docs.macroscope.com/cli) |
| Greptile | Its documented branch-review command ignores uncommitted changes. | Committed changes against a base branch, with repository context and instructions. | [Documented branch input](https://www.greptile.com/docs/code-review/greptile-cli) |

## Use Perch when the agent must preserve a named requirement

Consider an agent that moves tenant authorization out of an atomic database update. A review instruction can tell the agent to preserve authorization. A Perch rule gives it a separate check to run against the edited method and repeat after the repair. The [FastAPI tenant tutorial](https://frameworkrecipes.dev/fastapi/tenant-cancellation/) contains the source example, regression and recorded rule checks.

```
npm install -g @lakeday/perch
perch login
perch setup claude-code
# Or: perch setup codex
# Or: perch setup cursor
```

Download the focused rule and preserve your existing configuration:

```
curl -fL 'https://reporules.fyi/fastapi/tenant-cancellation/rule-pack.zip' -o tenant-rule.zip
unzip -n tenant-rule.zip
perch check orders.py --rules tenant-scoped-update --json
# Read the finding and repair the implementation.
perch check orders.py --rules tenant-scoped-update --json
```

Keep your root perch.yaml. Extraction preserves existing files and adds the focused pack under .perch/rules/. Review the selector and adapt the example path to your repository before checking. The setup commands above are choices for the agent you use. Repeat the identical check after the fix, alongside application regression tests.

## Does a CLI keep source code on the laptop?

A CLI identifies where the command runs. Perch's MIT CLI sends relevant source to the configured hosted model service. Macroscope also distinguishes the local command from hosted review analysis. Verify each provider's source-handling terms for the selected service; an open-source CLI license does not make inference offline.

## Which billing unit fits a repeated check?

Perch bills 10¢ per 1,000 fresh rule checks and reuses unchanged cached answers free, without developer seats. CodeRabbit's plan allowances and eligible per-file continuation affect local review costs. Macroscope CLI Agent credits meter model usage separately from GitHub per-KB reviews. These are different scopes, so a single per-PR number is not a like-for-like quality or cost result.

[Team billing assumptions](https://reviewpricing.fyi/team-review-costs/) · [Perch vs CodeRabbit](https://codereviewguide.fyi/perch-vs-coderabbit/) · [Perch vs Macroscope](https://codereviewguide.fyi/perch-vs-macroscope/)

## Should you replace committed-branch review?

Use a working-file check to shorten the agent's edit-and-repair cycle. Continue reviewing the committed branch and running tests before merge. A focused requirement check and a broad PR review can serve different purposes. Fresh judgments can vary, and a passing check does not establish application correctness.

Reviewed October 14, 2026. Published by Perch / Verglas LLC.

**Code Review Guide**

Tools & workflows.

Published by Perch · © 2026 Verglas LLC. Code Review Guide is a Perch publication.

Perch’s MIT license covers the CLI; hosted model analysis is a paid service. Relevant source is sent to the configured model service.

[Perch CLI MIT license](https://github.com/lakeday-org/perch/blob/main/LICENSE) · [Article text](https://codereviewguide.fyi/greptile-alternatives-uncommitted-code/index.md) · [Resource index](https://codereviewguide.fyi/llms.txt)