We're using an even cheaper model (K2.7 right now) and our PRs cost more to review (still < $1). I imagine we have a lot more going on in terms of review, even after moving the context gathering and comment posting responsibilities to scripts that run before/after the agent. It's more of a team, so we also end up with a dozen or so sessions from the subagents used.

We currently think it worth it. The review catches things humans and two paid options miss. It's definitely a wall of text and burnout fodder, the next step is an agent/skill that will make the changes after we humans comment on the comments, because the comment wall is not sustainable.

▲

StevenWaterman 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Per the article the luna review cost $0.004 and astra cost $0.113. The headline is per million tokens

	▲	verdverm 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I understand that, but sub-penny costs means you are hardly doing anything, even at the per-million token prices (which we pay lower values for, but more per-review overall). I cannot imagine they are doing as good of a review as they could be doing, which is to say minimizing pr review spend is not a goal in and of itself My aim right now is ~$1 per review (must have passing builds first), because it catches enough little things that my time just reading and replying costs more. I can focus on the bigger picture, except when they hallucinate at the nit level... why did we ever design swords with two sides anyway?