Every repository, one board.
Your work spans repositories, people and a growing stack of review automation.Limn lights all of it on one board — whose turn it is, what is stalled, what is ready to land — and measures what the AI review bots on top are actually worth. Free, open core, and it runs on your machine.
Or run it entirely on your machine — local mode uses your gh login and keeps no stored credentials.
More is shipping. It is waiting longer. And everyone claims first place.
more PRs merged since AI-assisted coding took hold
longer those PRs now spend waiting in review
the measured relevance of the average bot review comment
vendors claiming #1 on the same code-review benchmark
Sources: Faros AI, 10,000+ developers · Fatima et al., arXiv, April 2026 · the vendors’ own blogs, 2026.
Built for the engineers keeping up.
A review loop runs across whatever shape your code is in — one repository or twenty, a monorepo or a fleet of services. What changed is the volume moving through it. AI multiplied both halves at once: more pull requests, and far more commentary on each one.
The pace isn’t coming back down. So the tools have to come up.
To limn something is to bring it into enough light to see its shape — the word comes down from the Latin for illuminate. That is the whole idea: complexity you can see is complexity you can manage. The churn stays out there; you get the calm layer above it.
Which cuts both ways, and that is the part worth holding onto. A light shows you what is actually there. It does not invent what is not — so where the data will not carry a claim, Limn says so in words instead of filling the gap with a number.
If you write the code
Your day arrives out of order: a build to fix here, a review to answer there, six bot comments on the one you thought was done, a conflict that appeared overnight. Limn ranks all of it across every repository and puts the next thing at the top.
- One ranked queue across every repository — a red build, an unanswered review, a stale thread, a conflict.
- Ordered by how close each job is to finished, how long it has sat, and how directly it is tied to you.
- And the top of it is finishable in place — reply, approve, merge, clear the conflict, without a tab.
If you run the team
Where the effort went, how long it waited, and what the review automation cost — counted the same way in every repository. Limn measures the whole loop on your own data, and refuses the questions that data will not support.
- Throughput, lead time and reach per repository, with people counted apart from automation. Free.
- A forwardable report per sprint, and an hour-by-hour account of who was holding each pull request.
- And a keep / tune / noisy verdict on every review bot you pay for, priced per comment your team used.
Everything waiting, in one list.
Review requests, threads somebody answered, red builds, conflicts you can fix — across every repository in the workspace, ranked, with the actions on the same row. A card exists only while you still owe something; there is nothing to dismiss.
Free on every tier, the ranking included. Only the written reason on each row is Pro.
How the work actually moved.
Throughput, lead time, and how long a pull request waited for its first human review — across every repository at once, with people counted apart from automation, because a blended median describes no pull request anyone wrote.
Free on every tier. Pro turns the same numbers into a stored report per sprint you can forward, and an hour-by-hour account of whether the waiting sat with a reviewer or with the author — with nobody named.
And the automation stacked on top of it.
A team can be running two to six review vendors at once, and none of them reports on itself. Limn grades every bot comment independently, with a purpose-trained classifier that, graded blind against a human expert, picked the same severity seven times in ten — where the vendors’ own badges managed fewer than five. Free, on every tier.
Pro turns those grades into a scoreboard: how much of what each vendor said your team acted on, what that came to per comment, how often it called something major that was not — and where all of it sits against a cohort of 2,204 repositories.
Or run the whole thing on your own machine.
One command, your existing gh login, a SQLite file on your disk. No hosted backend, no stored credentials, nothing leaving the machine. The free tier is identical either way, and the conflict resolver only exists in this mode.
npx pierre-review
Free answers one pull request. Pro answers the fortnight.
Limn is open core. The free tier is the product, not a trial — it has no repository limit, no user limit and no expiry, and every action you take on a pull request lives in it. Pro is what happens when you need the same truth one grain up: across repositories, across people, across a period.
What is waiting on me?
The whole worklist, ranked. My Turn, review requests, red builds, conflicts — across every repository.
Same list, with a written reason on each of the top items and a line saying what can safely wait.
What happened on this pull request?
Every thread triaged — untouched, replied, likely addressed, resolved. Blast radius, blockers, merge verdict.
A short written summary, a read on what a red build means, and a check on whether a comment was really addressed.
Can I act without leaving?
Reply, resolve, approve, merge, merge-when-ready, update from trunk, resolve conflicts hunk by hunk.
Everything free does. Acting on a pull request is never the paid part.
Which review bots are worth their seat?
Detect every bot, name it, set its role and record what it costs — and an independent severity grade on every comment it leaves.
The per-bot scoreboard: keep / tune / noisy, dollars per comment your team acted on, over-calling as a weekly line.
How does that compare to other teams?
—
Your bots placed against a 2,204-repository cohort, with a written refusal wherever the cohort is too thin to answer.
How is the team doing?
Flow metrics for the workspace, activity and reach by repository, open pull requests and trunk health.
A stored report per sprint or month, compared like-for-like against the last one, with the coverage stated.
Is a repository about to bite us?
Default-branch health across every repository, the commit that broke it, and the pull request that landed it.
Everything free does. Trunk health is never the paid part — it is the thing you need at the worst moment.
Where is the time actually going?
—
Chronology: every open hour attributed to a reviewer, an author, or waiting to land. Nobody is named.
What do I take into a one-to-one?
—
A report with a section per person you pick. Preparation, not a ranking — there is no leaderboard anywhere in it.
Can I keep the noise down?
Bots hidden by default, notifications only for work that is personally yours, and a per-repository mute.
Everything free does, plus a Slack digest per workspace if you would rather read it there.
Where does it run?
npx pierre-review on your machine, or the hosted service. No repository limit, no user limit.
The same two places. Pro unlocks on whichever one you already use.
Pro lists at $25 per user, and is free for a month to anyone who asks for it. A user is someone who signs in — bots never count, and there is no per-repository charge.
What a free account actually sees. The paid panes are listed and locked rather than hidden, so you can tell what you are not buying before you buy it — and the free metrics above them are the ones that moved here off another tab.
Start free. Every repository, nothing missed.
Sign in with GitHub and the first repositories are on screen in a couple of minutes, or run the whole free tier on your own machine and keep the data there. For Pro, send a message — it is free for a month, for asking.
Card payments are not switched on yet, so Pro is not sold from this page — it is given, a month at a time, to anyone who asks. No card, nothing to cancel. Or run the free tier locally: npx pierre-review