Source: https://codereviewguide.fyi/macroscope-vs-cubic/

[AI code review head-to-head library](https://codereviewguide.fyi/tool-comparisons/)

# Macroscope vs Cubic

Macroscope CLI freezes work in progress and meters hosted analysis through Agent credits. Cubic provides local review and Team custom agents with reviewed-line allowances. Both handle uncommitted work; compare the review unit and the recurring workload.

Code Review Guide · Reviewed October 14, 2026 · Published by Perch / Verglas LLC

## Macroscope and Cubic at a glance

Documented review inputs, requirements and licensing

| Decision | Macroscope | Cubic |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Review scope | GitHub reviews and local or agent-driven checks. | PR and local review with plan-specific reviewed-line allowances. |
| Local review input | MIT local CLI reviews working-tree and branch changes. | cubic review checks uncommitted edits or changes against a base branch. |
| Custom requirements | Markdown agent instructions, path selection and configurable check-run agents. | cubic.yaml custom agents; Team includes 5 agents. |
| License and service | MIT local CLI; commercial hosted analysis. | Commercial review service. |
| Official references | [Macroscope sources](https://codereviewguide.fyi/macroscope-vs-cubic/#sources-macroscope) | [Cubic sources](https://codereviewguide.fyi/macroscope-vs-cubic/#sources-cubic) |

## Compare snapshot usage with reviewed-line subscriptions

Use the same branch base, exclusions and saved requirement. Record Macroscope CLI analysis usage and Cubic reviewed lines and agent count. GitHub per-KB rates are not a quote for Macroscope CLI review.

### Macroscope billing

GitHub Balanced review: 5¢/KB with a 10 KB minimum. Other modes: 2.5–20¢/KB. No seat fees.

GitHub diff-size pricing is separate from CLI/agent model cost plus 5%. Free monthly credits and welcome credit are available. No fixed per-PR total is assumed.

[Macroscope plan sources and workload assumptions](https://reviewpricing.fyi/macroscope/)

### Cubic billing

Team: $30/developer/month billed yearly. Starter includes 20 PR reviews/month free.

Team annual subscription floor, including 40,000 reviewed lines per seat per period; extra lines cost $20/10,000. Flex usage settings affect whether reviews pause.

[Cubic plan sources and workload assumptions](https://reviewpricing.fyi/cubic/)

Subscription amounts are plan floors or quoted allowances. Repeated reviews, selected effort, provider charges and exclusions can change the bill. Equal review counts do not establish equal analysis scope.

A third option for the agent’s next edit

## When Perch is the better choice

Perch is a stronger fit when a specific behavior requirement needs an independent check. The agent can rerun that rule after fixing the method, with unchanged checks reused free.

For an agent that repeatedly removes tenant authorization from a database update, save the requirement as a named Perch rule:

```
- name: tenant-scoped-update
  where: "orders.py"
  ensure: >-
    The cancellation UPDATE must constrain tenant_id to actor.tenant_id
    before changing the order. An id-only or owner-only update breaks
    this requirement.
```

This requirement comes from the [FastAPI tenant-authorization recipe](https://frameworkrecipes.dev/fastapi/tenant-cancellation/), which includes the implementation, deliberate regression and captured Perch checks. The same named check can run against the working file after the next agent edit. [Perch working-file checks](https://github.com/lakeday-org/perch/blob/main/docs/check.md) support selecting rules directly; [rule selectors](https://github.com/lakeday-org/perch/blob/main/docs/rules.md) cover project, file and method scope.

### Install, configure the agent, check and repair

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

Use the setup command for your coding agent. Download the focused pack without replacing existing files:

```
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
# Repair the reported finding after the agent edit.
perch check orders.py --rules tenant-scoped-update --json
```

Keep your existing root perch.yaml. The ZIP adds its focused rule under .perch/rules/; unzip -n preserves existing files. Review and adapt the selector and application path before running it in your repository. Run the saved check after an edit, repair any finding, and repeat the identical check alongside application regression tests.

[Download the tenant-authorization rule pack](https://reporules.fyi/fastapi/tenant-cancellation/rule-pack.zip) · [Inspect pack contents and agent task](https://reporules.fyi/fastapi/tenant-cancellation/)

### Pay for fresh checks, reuse unchanged answers

Perch charges 10¢ per 1,000 fresh rule checks, with no developer seat fees. Cached unchanged checks are free. About 50¢ per mid-sized PR is a rounded estimate for approximately 150 methods read at the captured September–October 2026 density of 34 questions per method; the unrounded example is 51¢. A single named-rule check is a different scope. [Team workload calculations](https://reviewpricing.fyi/team-review-costs/) show the assumptions.

The [Perch CLI is MIT licensed](https://github.com/lakeday-org/perch/blob/main/LICENSE); hosted analysis is paid and relevant source is sent to the configured model service. Fresh model judgments can vary. Unchanged requests can reuse cached results.

## Test the same requirement before choosing

1. Use one authorized public change with a known regression and a clean control. Pin the base and reviewed code, and keep the documented requirement available to both tools.
2. Record each tool’s configuration, reviewed files, review effort, findings and false positives. Record cost and elapsed time from the actual run.
3. Repair the regression and repeat the relevant review. For Perch, preserve existing configuration, run the saved rule after the edit, and repeat the same check after repairing a finding.

This article compares documented product workflows and terms. The [public evaluation materials](https://reviewbenchmarks.dev/evaluations/order-service/) include captured Perch requirement checks; authenticated CodeRabbit and Greptile runs remain unscored. They do not establish a measured accuracy ranking between these tools.

## Sources and related comparisons

Reviewed October 14, 2026. Unverified features are marked as unverified rather than treated as absent. Current terms and actual trial results should determine a purchase.

### Macroscope documentation

- [docs.macroscope.com/pricing](https://docs.macroscope.com/pricing)
- [docs.macroscope.com/cli](https://docs.macroscope.com/cli)
- [www.macroscope.com/content/ai-code-review-cli-local-terminal-reviews](https://www.macroscope.com/content/ai-code-review-cli-local-terminal-reviews)
- [www.macroscope.com/blog/introducing-check-run-agents](https://www.macroscope.com/blog/introducing-check-run-agents)
- [github.com/prassoai/macroscope-local/blob/main/LICENSE](https://github.com/prassoai/macroscope-local/blob/main/LICENSE)

### Cubic documentation

- [www.cubic.dev/pricing-plans](https://www.cubic.dev/pricing-plans)
- [docs.cubic.dev/ai-review/quickstart](https://docs.cubic.dev/ai-review/quickstart)
- [docs.cubic.dev/ai-review/custom-agents](https://docs.cubic.dev/ai-review/custom-agents)
- [docs.cubic.dev/ide/cli-review](https://docs.cubic.dev/ide/cli-review)
- [docs.cubic.dev/account/ai-review-usage](https://docs.cubic.dev/account/ai-review-usage)
- [docs.cubic.dev/account/privacy-security](https://docs.cubic.dev/account/privacy-security)

### Continue comparing

- [CodeRabbit vs Macroscope](https://codereviewguide.fyi/coderabbit-vs-macroscope/)
- [CodeRabbit vs Cubic](https://codereviewguide.fyi/coderabbit-vs-cubic/)
- [Greptile vs Macroscope](https://codereviewguide.fyi/greptile-vs-macroscope/)
- [Greptile vs Cubic](https://codereviewguide.fyi/greptile-vs-cubic/)
- [Qodo vs Macroscope](https://codereviewguide.fyi/qodo-vs-macroscope/)
- [Qodo vs Cubic](https://codereviewguide.fyi/qodo-vs-cubic/)
- [Perch vs Macroscope](https://codereviewguide.fyi/perch-vs-macroscope/)
- [Perch vs Cubic](https://codereviewguide.fyi/perch-vs-cubic/)

**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/macroscope-vs-cubic/index.md) · [Resource index](https://codereviewguide.fyi/llms.txt)