Greptile Alternative: MCP Code Graph

This page is for teams that use Greptile for AI code review, or evaluated it, and now want an AI coding agent to have the code graph while it writes, ahead of the review that runs once the pull request exists. Greptile and Symvanta both attach to your codebase and both speak MCP, so it is easy to assume they compete head to head. They sit at different points in the same workflow.

What Greptile does

Greptile is an AI code reviewer. It watches pull requests, reads the diff against full codebase context, and posts review comments: multi-file logic bugs, security risks, style violations, and repo-specific rules written in plain English (Greptile). Two pieces sit on top of that: TREX, which writes and runs tests for a PR in a sandbox to validate behavior at runtime, and the Greptile Agent, a set of parallel agents that assess a change's impact beyond the diff (Greptile). Greptile calls itself the central validation layer for code changes, and that is an accurate description of what it does: it grades work an agent or a human already produced.

The layer each one works at

The role difference is the whole comparison. Greptile runs on the PR, after the code is written, and its value is catching what slipped through before the change merges. Symvanta runs while the agent is still writing. It parses each repository into a live graph (nodes are symbols, edges are calls, imports, implements, and instantiates) and exposes that graph as MCP tools the agent calls mid-task. Before an agent edits a shared function, it can ask Symvanta for the blast radius and get back every caller and dependent across files and repositories, so it knows what breaks before it touches anything. One product reduces bad diffs by reviewing them after the fact; the other reduces them by handing the author the map first.

That distinction is the subject of why AI coding agents fail on large codebases: the agent finds a plausible match and guesses what it is connected to. A reviewer catches some of those guesses once they are on the page; a graph keeps the agent from guessing to begin with. The tradeoff between search and graph is code embeddings vs. code graph: search tells you what looks related, a graph tells you what is actually connected.

What each exposes over MCP

Both ship an MCP server, and this is where the difference gets concrete. Greptile's MCP exposes its review product: eleven tools across custom context (coding patterns and standards), pull request data, review lifecycle, and comment search, so an agent in your IDE can pull unaddressed Greptile comments and apply the fixes without leaving the editor (Greptile MCP docs). It brings review feedback to the agent.

Symvanta's MCP exposes the graph itself. relate answers callers, dependencies, blast_radius, implementers, heritage, and chain; find_node resolves a symbol to its definition and signature; find_http_route maps a method and path to its handler. Text search and Qdrant embeddings sit beside the graph for literal and semantic lookups. The agent is not reading someone's review of the code, it is querying the structure of the code directly.

Pricing, as of July 2026

Greptile is self-serve with a free tier. Starter is free for a single active developer: unlimited repositories, 50 credits a month, where one credit is one standard review and three credits is one TREX review. Pro is $30 per seat per month with 50 credits included per seat and $1 per credit after that, unlimited users, custom rules, and unlimited connected apps. Enterprise is custom with a self-hosting option, SSO/SAML, and GitHub Enterprise support. Both paid paths carry a 14-day trial (Greptile pricing).

Symvanta is also self-serve and per seat: Starter at $19 a month, Pro at $29 per seat a month with a 7-day trial, Enterprise at $99 per seat a month with a 15-seat minimum. Greptile's Pro price is per seat with review credits on top, so the bill tracks how many reviews you run as well as headcount. Symvanta's per-seat price tracks how many developers point an agent at the graph, independent of how many changes they ship.

Cross-repo and deployment

Greptile reviews a PR with context from that repository, works with GitHub and GitLab, and offers self-hosting on Enterprise (Greptile). Symvanta links repositories into one project and matches the couplings a single-repo view misses: HTTP call sites to the routes they hit across services, SQL table access to the ORM model that owns the table, queue producers to consumers on the same channel. Indexing is branch-aware, so an agent can pin a session to a feature branch or query uncommitted working-tree edits. It runs as a hosted MCP endpoint by default, with an on-prem bundle for Enterprise, and works with Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, and any MCP client.

Side by side

Who should pick Greptile

If your main gap is code review, catching bugs and standards violations on every PR before it merges, and you want runtime validation that actually runs tests, Greptile is a focused, mature product built for exactly that. It fits a team that wants a consistent reviewer on every change and is happy to pull that review feedback into the editor over MCP.

Who should pick Symvanta

If you want the agent itself to know the code before it edits, to ask who calls this and what breaks if I change it and get a graph traversal back, and you want that across linked repositories and pinned to a branch, that is the gap Symvanta fills. Symvanta is the map the agent reads while writing the diff, so fewer bad ones reach a reviewer at all.

The two are not mutually exclusive. A team can give its agents the graph through Symvanta and still run Greptile on the resulting PRs. The question this page answers is which one closes your current gap.

The fastest way to tell is on a codebase you maintain. Book a 15-minute demo and bring a real question about real code.