Integrating Claude Code with GitHub Actions for AI-Powered Code Reviews
Automated code reviews are one of the highest-value Claude Code integrations. Every pull request gets a thorough review before human reviewers even look at it.
Creating the Review Workflow
> Create a GitHub Actions workflow at .github/workflows/claude-review.yml
> that triggers on pull request events (opened, synchronize). The
> workflow should:
> 1. Check out the code
> 2. Install Claude Code
> 3. Run Claude to review the diff between the PR branch and main
> 4. Post the review as a PR comment
> Use the ANTHROPIC_API_KEY secret for authentication.
The Workflow File
Claude Code should generate something like:
name: Claude Code Review
on:
pull_request:
types: [opened, synchronize]
permissions:
contents: read
pull-requests: write
jobs:
review:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
with:
node-version: '22'
- name: Install Claude Code
run: npm install -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code
- name: Review PR
env:
ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}
run: |
DIFF=$(git diff origin/main...HEAD)
claude --print "Review this code diff for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and style inconsistencies. Be specific and actionable: $DIFF" > review.md
- name: Post Review Comment
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
const fs = require('fs');
const review = fs.readFileSync('review.md', 'utf8');
await github.rest.issues.createComment({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
issue_number: context.issue.number,
body: `## 🤖 Claude Code Review\n\n${review}`
});
Testing the Review Workflow
- Create a new branch:
git checkout -b test/review-workflow - Make a deliberate code change (add a feature or introduce a style issue)
- Push and create a PR:
gh pr create --title "Test AI review" --body "Testing automated review" - Wait for the GitHub Actions workflow to complete
- Check the PR comments for Claude's review
What Claude Reviews
The automated review checks for:
- Bugs — Null references, off-by-one errors, race conditions
- Security — SQL injection, XSS, hardcoded secrets
- Performance — N+1 queries, unnecessary re-renders, memory leaks
- Style — Naming conventions, code organization, documentation gaps
- Best practices — Error handling, input validation, testing coverage
Key Takeaways
- Automated PR reviews catch issues before human review
- The workflow triggers on every PR creation and update
- Claude reviews diffs specifically, focusing on what changed
- Post reviews as PR comments for easy team visibility
- This workflow saves significant time in code review cycles