[DOCS] Commands reference missing `/ultrareview` cloud code review command

Status Fixed / completed
Maintainer reply None cached
Activity 4 comments · opened Apr 16, 2026 · closed May 28, 2026

Documentation Type

Missing documentation (feature not documented)

Documentation Location

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/commands

Section/Topic

Built-in commands table for review commands and PR review workflows

Current Documentation

The commands reference currently says:

/review | Deprecated. Install the code-review plugin instead: claude plugin install code-review@claude-plugins-official /security-review | Analyze pending changes on the current branch for security vulnerabilities. Reviews the git diff and identifies risks like injection, auth issues, and data exposure

The Code Review page currently documents GitHub comment triggers instead of a CLI slash command:

Two comment commands start a review on demand. Both work regardless of the repository's configured trigger, so you can use them to opt specific PRs into review in Manual mode or to get an immediate re-review in other modes. @claude review — Starts a review and subscribes the PR to push-triggered reviews going forward @claude review once — Starts a single review without subscribing the PR to future pushes

No documentation currently exists for /ultrareview, its cloud execution model, or its argument behavior.

What's Wrong or Missing?

Changelog v2.1.111 added /ultrareview for running comprehensive code review in the cloud using parallel multi-agent analysis and critique, with two documented invocation modes: no arguments to review the current branch, or /ultrareview <PR#> to fetch and review a specific GitHub PR.

The current docs do not mention this command anywhere in the command reference or review docs. Users reading the docs still see a deprecated /review command and GitHub comment-based @claude review workflows, but nothing that explains:

  • that /ultrareview exists
  • that it runs review in the cloud
  • that it can review the current branch with no arguments
  • that it accepts a PR number to review a specific GitHub PR
  • how it relates to existing Code Review documentation

Suggested Improvement

Add /ultrareview [PR#] to the commands reference with a short description, requirements, and examples such as:

  • /ultrareview
  • /ultrareview 1234

Also add a short cross-reference in the Code Review docs that explains when to use /ultrareview versus repository-level Code Review and @claude review comments.

At minimum, document:

  • that the command runs a comprehensive review in the cloud
  • that it uses parallel multi-agent analysis/critique
  • the default current-branch behavior when no argument is provided
  • the PR-number form for reviewing a specific GitHub PR

Impact

Medium - Makes feature difficult to understand

Additional Context

Affected Pages:

| Page | Context |
|------|---------|
| https://code.claude.com/docs/en/commands | Built-in command reference currently lists deprecated /review and adjacent review commands, but not /ultrareview |
| https://code.claude.com/docs/en/code-review | Review workflow page explains multi-agent PR reviews and @claude review / @claude review once, but not the new /ultrareview CLI entry point |

Total scope: 2 pages affected

Source: Changelog v2.1.111

Changelog entry:

Added /ultrareview for running comprehensive code review in the cloud using parallel multi-agent analysis and critique — invoke with no arguments to review your current branch, or /ultrareview <PR#> to fetch and review a specific GitHub PR

View original on GitHub ↗

4 Comments

q2-kkendall · 6 months ago
 ▐▛███▜▌   Claude Code v2.1.111
▝▜█████▛▘  Opus 4.6 · API Usage Billing
  ▘▘ ▝▝    ~/code/

/ultrareview

❯ Unknown command: /ultrareview
coygeek · 5 months ago

Just checked the current docs again. This issue is not fully resolved yet.

coygeek · 4 months ago

Issue #49291 Verification

Title: [DOCS] Commands reference missing /ultrareview cloud code review command
Issue Date: 2026-04-16
Verification Date: 2026-05-28
Status: RESOLVED

---

Issue Summary

This issue reports that the Claude Code documentation did not document /ultrareview, a cloud-based multi-agent code review command introduced in changelog v2.1.111. The reporter expected coverage in the commands reference and Code Review docs, including invocation with no arguments (current branch) or with a PR number, plus guidance on how it relates to /review and @claude review workflows.

---

Verification Results

Claim 1: Commands reference does not mention /ultrareview

Status: RESOLVED

At https://code.claude.com/docs/en/commands, line 133 documents /ultrareview [PR]:

Run a deep, multi-agent code review in a cloud sandbox with ultrareview. The preferred invocation is now /code-review ultra, and /ultrareview remains as an alias.

The same page also documents /code-review ... ultra at line 58 and mentions cloud review in the "Before you ship" overview at line 25.

Verdict: The commands reference now includes /ultrareview with a description of cloud execution and alias behavior.

---

Claim 2: No documentation for cloud execution model, parallel multi-agent analysis, or argument behavior

Status: RESOLVED

The dedicated page at https://code.claude.com/docs/en/ultrareview documents:

  • Line 13: ultrareview runs on Claude Code web infrastructure with a fleet of reviewer agents in a remote sandbox
  • Lines 17-19: parallel multi-agent coverage and independent verification
  • Lines 27-31: no-argument invocation reviews the diff between the current branch and the default branch
  • Lines 33-39: PR-number form (/code-review ultra 1234) for reviewing a specific GitHub pull request

The CLI reference at https://code.claude.com/docs/en/cli-reference, line 40, also documents the non-interactive claude ultrareview [target] subcommand.

Verdict: Cloud execution, multi-agent behavior, and both invocation modes are documented on a dedicated page.

---

Claim 3: Code Review docs lack cross-reference to /ultrareview

Status: RESOLVED

At https://code.claude.com/docs/en/code-review, line 284:

/code-review ultra --fix runs the deeper ultrareview in the cloud, then applies its findings to your working tree when they arrive back in your session.

The ultrareview page at https://code.claude.com/docs/en/ultrareview, lines 88-102, cross-references Code Review for automatic GitHub PR reviews and includes a comparison table between /review and /code-review ultra.

Verdict: Code Review and ultrareview pages now cross-reference each other and explain when to use each workflow.

---

Claim 4: /review still shown as deprecated without ultrareview guidance

Status: RESOLVED

At https://code.claude.com/docs/en/commands, line 110, /review [PR] is documented as a local pull request review with a pointer to the deeper cloud-based review at /code-review ultra. The deprecated plugin-install wording cited in the original issue is no longer present.

Verdict: The outdated deprecated /review entry described in the issue has been replaced with current guidance that links to ultrareview.

---

Current State

| Claim | Status |
|-------|--------|
| /ultrareview missing from commands reference | RESOLVED |
| No docs for cloud execution, multi-agent review, or argument behavior | RESOLVED |
| Code Review page lacks ultrareview cross-reference | RESOLVED |
| /review deprecated entry without ultrareview guidance | RESOLVED |

---

Suggested Fix

N/A - issue has been resolved.

---

References

---

Conclusion & Recommendation

Primary Concern: The documentation did not explain /ultrareview or how cloud-based multi-agent review relates to existing review commands.

Resolution Status: RESOLVED

Recommendation: CLOSE

Current documentation covers /ultrareview in the commands reference, provides a dedicated ultrareview guide with invocation examples and cloud execution details, and cross-references the feature from the Code Review page. Every material claim in the original issue is now addressed.

---

github-actions[bot] · 2 months ago

This issue has been automatically locked since it was closed and has not had any activity for 7 days. If you're experiencing a similar issue, please file a new issue and reference this one if it's relevant.