Code Quality
AI QA Agent
Runs structured test plans against your application and reports defects with evidence.
Code Quality
AI Code Review Agent for GitLab
Merge requests in your GitLab project get reviewed against your standards, with comments on the changed lines.
Merge requests in GitLab often wait for a reviewer, and what gets caught depends on who is free that day. This agent reviews every merge request in your project for bugs, security issues and your coding standards, and comments on the changed lines. It reads pipeline results for context, connects with a project or group access token, and leaves every merge to your developers.
- Comments on the changed lines of every GitLab merge request
- Pipeline results used as context for each review
- Project or group access token, with merges left to you
$4,400
20–30 working days
Optional maintenance $249/mo
What it is
AI Code Review Agent for GitLab reviews merge requests in one GitLab project for bugs, security issues and your coding standards, and comments on the changed lines for a developer to accept or dismiss. Pipelines sit in its mapping for context, and it connects with a project or group access token. Merges stay with your team.
Why businesses buy it
Slow merge request reviews hold up releases, and inconsistent ones let bugs and security issues slip into main. Your best engineers spend hours repeating the same standard comments. This agent gives every GitLab merge request a consistent first pass against your own standards, so reviewers start from findings rather than a blank diff and releases move faster. No GitLab plan upgrade is needed. The Scope Card fixes the project, mapping, connected systems and trial on real merge requests before you order, so your team knows exactly what will run.
Problems this solves
Merge requests stall while senior developers are busy elsewhere
The agent reviews each merge request in your GitLab project and comments on the changed lines. Developers get feedback to act on before a senior colleague is free.
A review that ignores pipeline results misses important context
Pipelines sit in the documented mapping, so the agent can see job results beside the diff. Its comments can take a failing job into account rather than reviewing the code in isolation.
Access tokens need to be tightly scoped and owned by you
It connects with a project or group access token you create and hold. The field mapping lists exactly what it reads and writes in the one GitLab project.
Each developer applies the team's standards a little differently
Your coding standards are loaded into its configuration, so every merge request is checked against the same rules. A developer accepts or dismisses each comment, and merges stay with your team.
A good fit if
Your team ships through GitLab merge requests, and reviews queue behind the same two or three people.
A maintainer can create a GitLab project or group access token with the agreed scopes.
Your coding standards for the project's main stack are written down, or can be described at intake.
You want review findings in the merge request discussion, not in another tool.
Not the right fit if
Your repositories are on GitHub. See AI Code Review Agent for GitHub.
Your bigger problem is failing GitLab pipelines that nobody has time to diagnose. See AI DevOps Agent for GitLab.
You want structured test plans run against your app. See AI QA Agent for GitLab.
You want new tests written for existing code. See AI Test Generation.
How it works
- A GitLab project or group access token connects one project, with the mapping of merge requests and pipelines agreed with your admin.
- When a merge request opens or changes, the agent reads the diff against your standards for the stack in scope.
- Findings are posted as comments on the specific lines in the merge request, each with the reason.
- Pipelines are in the agreed mapping, so the review can take the merge request's pipeline result into account.
- Findings you want tracked go to the one other system, such as Jira or Slack.
- It comments only; merging stays with your maintainers. It is trialled on 20 real merge requests before launch.
What you provide within 72 hours
Your portal lists these the moment you order. Delivery starts the working day after everything is in and your access is checked.
- A GitLab project or group access token with the agreed scopes.
- A GitLab admin or maintainer for a 30-minute setup call.
- Your CI/CD configuration details.
- Coding standards or runbooks for the stack being reviewed.
- Access to your tracker or chat tool if findings should go there.
- One decision-maker for approvals.
- An API key for your own AI model account (for example OpenAI or Google Gemini), created for this build with a spending limit.
The 72-hour rule. Send everything on your checklist, including access, within 72 hours of ordering so your build starts on time.
Timeline
Start
Intake verified; project, stack and token scope agreed.
Weeks 1–2
Review rules written from your standards.
Week 3
GitLab token connected; merge request comments tested.
Weeks 3–4
Trialled on 20 real merge requests.
Week 4
Your review, two rounds of changes.
Go-live
Live on the project; recorded 45-minute handoff.
| Option | Delivery time | Price |
|---|---|---|
| Standard | 20–30 working days | $4,400 |
| Express | 15–25 working days | $5,150 |
| Rush | 10–20 working days | $5,950 |
What you receive at handover
- The review agent running on one GitLab project, commenting on changed lines
- GitLab connection through a project or group access token, plus one more system
- Documented field mapping, including pipeline context
- Your coding standards set in the review configuration
- Test report from a trial on 20 merge requests, admin guide and recorded handoff
- 30 days of post-launch support
Expected benefits and how to measure them
- Can keep merge requests moving when reviewers are stretched.
- Helps the whole team work to one shared set of standards.
- Merge request review time
- Use GitLab's merge request analytics to compare time from open to first comment, before launch and after.
- Comments accepted
- Each week, sample the agent's comments and record how many developers acted on versus dismissed.
- Failed pipelines after merge
- Count pipelines failing on the default branch for a month before launch and each month after.
Before you start: Note current review time on merge requests and how often the default branch pipeline fails. Write down your top coding standards.
These are things to track, not promised results. Outcomes depend on your data, your team and your market.
Running costs
You pay for the build once. Running costs are roughly $20 to $200 a month in your own accounts for AI usage and CI minutes, depending on merge request volume.
Your GitLab plan stays as it is. AI usage during build and trial is billed to you.
Ask about running costsCustom requirements
A second GitLab project, another stack, or custom GitLab objects outside the mapping need a written Change Quote, sent of a note at checkout.
Request a custom versionKeep it running
Monthly maintenance covers monitoring, fixes, model and platform updates, a monthly health report and monthly hours for changes, for example tightening a rule or adding a new standard. It begins after the 30 days of support.
$249/mo (the minimum fee, includes 2 change hours)
Optional. Starts after the post-launch support period. Cancel any month.
How maintenance worksHow this compares
| Do it yourself with a SaaS tool | Hire a custom agency | Upmark Labs | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | A review tool bills per seat | A contract reviewer bills by the hour | Ours is one fixed price, shown before you buy |
| Where findings go | A separate report or app | An email or document | Ours comments in the merge request discussion |
| Standards | General rules | The reviewer's preferences | Ours uses your standards |
| Delivery | Fast install, slow tuning | Weeks to onboard | Ours has a fixed delivery time shown before you buy, with faster options |
Questions about this product
Does it work with GitLab merge requests rather than pull requests?
Yes. This edition is built for GitLab merge requests. It reads the changes in each merge request on the project in scope and posts comments on the specific lines, in the same discussion your maintainers use, so nobody has to check another tool for review findings.
Should we use a GitLab project or group access token for reviews?
Either works. A project access token limits the agent to the single project in scope, which is the narrowest option. A group token suits teams that manage access at group level. Your GitLab admin chooses during the 30-minute setup call, and either can be revoked at any time.
Will the agent ever merge a GitLab merge request?
No. It comments and suggests; maintainers decide whether a merge request is approved and merged. That boundary is part of the build, not a setting someone can forget. If a finding should hold up a merge, your team decides that in GitLab using its own rules.
How does the review agent use GitLab pipelines?
Pipelines are part of the agreed mapping, so the agent can see the merge request's pipeline result alongside the code it reviews. It does not change your pipeline configuration. If you want failing pipelines diagnosed and fixes proposed, that is the AI DevOps Agent for GitLab.
What does GitLab code review cost each month to run?
Roughly $20 to $200 a month in your own accounts for AI usage and CI minutes, rising with merge request volume. Your GitLab subscription is unchanged, and no plan upgrade is needed. Nothing is billed per developer by us, and the build itself is a one-time payment.
When can GitLab merge request reviews start?
Delivery runs on a fixed schedule from a verified intake, and the delivery panel shows that date plus express and rush options before you buy. Creating the access token and sharing your coding standards early keeps the date on track, since the review rules are built from them.
A first pass on every GitLab merge request.
Order AI Code Review Agent for GitLab and merge requests in your project get reviewed against your standards on a fixed delivery date, with comments on the changed lines.
Works well with
