1
Map for zero tokens
Codna builds a dependency and blast-radius graph deterministically — no LLM, no embeddings, ~60ms per repo. Same map every time, for zero tokens.
Comparison
Codna vs Claude Code
Both can fix a bug. The difference is what they read first. Claude Code is a capable agent that explores your repo inside the model; Codna maps it deterministically for zero tokens, then hands the agent a tiny evidence bundle. Keep Claude Code. Make it surgical.
The problem
How Claude Code understands your code
Claude Code is a strong agent. To understand a repository it works the way a careful engineer would: it reads files, follows imports, greps for symbols, and builds a mental model inside the model itself. That model is reasoned, not deterministic — the exploration path can vary run to run, the orientation tokens add up before the first fix is proposed, and the work is repeated on the next task. MCP servers it loads can pin thousands of tokens of context into every subsequent prompt. It is good at exploring. It does not, on its own, gate a fix on your test suite.
How Codna fixes it
How Codna makes Claude Code surgical
Whole repo100,000+
Evidence bundle~600
2
Hand Claude Code evidence, not the repo
Via the MCP server, Claude Code receives a ~600-token bundle — suspect files, call paths, the failing test — instead of exploring 100k tokens to find them.
3
Verify before it ships
Codna gates the patch on your own test suite. A fix that fails the tests never ships — the agent's reasoning becomes a verified change, not a confident guess.
codna fix . --issue "the checkout test is failing"
What you get
What Codna adds to Claude Code
A zero-token repo map
Codna builds a deterministic dependency and blast-radius graph in about 60ms per repo — no LLM, no embeddings, no tokens. Claude Code explores your code inside the model on every task; Codna hands it the map instead.
Fixes from ~600 tokens, not 100k
Through the MCP server, Claude Code receives a ~600-token evidence bundle — suspect files, call paths, the failing test — a measured 162x less context than reading the whole repo to find them.
A hard test gate on every fix
A patch must pass your own test suite before it is proposed, so the agent's reasoning becomes a verified change rather than a confident guess. A fix that fails the tests never ships.
The proof
Fewer tokens. Faster. Verified.
Frequently asked
No. Codna is the precision and verification layer. Claude Code stays your agent; Codna gives it a deterministic repo map, a small evidence bundle, and a test gate via the MCP server. They complement each other.
Yes, keep using it. Codna runs as an MCP server that Claude Code calls, so its zero-token map, evidence bundles, and test gate plug into the agent you already use — no IDE switch and no change to your workflow.
Claude Code understands a repo by reading it inside the model: opening files, following imports, building a reasoned mental model that can vary run to run and is rebuilt on the next task. Codna derives a deterministic graph from the code itself in about 60ms for zero tokens — the same exact map every time, current at the moment you run it, with no orientation tokens spent before the first fix.
Codna is model-agnostic via bring-your-own-key, so you can point it at Claude or any other model, or use a managed option. Its deterministic understanding layer has been measured across 130 repos in 110 languages, mapped in 9.2 seconds for zero LLM tokens.
Only if you choose to. Codna is bring-your-own-key and can run fully self-hosted with fail-closed egress, and it never trains on your code. The deterministic map runs locally for zero tokens, so understanding your repo never leaves your environment.
Claude Code is $20/mo Pro plus per-token usage (Anthropic, retrieved 2026-06). Codna fixes from a ~600-token evidence bundle — about $0.04 per verified fix at public model rates — versus roughly $1+ for a typical agentic edit that reads the whole repo, because Codna does the repo understanding for zero tokens.
Related
