1
Map, don't explore
Codna builds an exact dependency and blast-radius graph deterministically — no LLM exploration, about 60ms per repo for zero tokens. It knows what a change actually breaks instead of discovering it one file read at a time.
Comparison
Codna vs Cline
Cline is a capable open-source coding agent that drives the model through your codebase. Codna takes the other path: a deterministic repo graph and a hard test gate, so every fix is verified. In an 87-task head-to-head, Codna verified 100% of fixes to Cline's 73.6% — using 4× fewer tokens and running 5.4× faster.
The problem
How Cline works a codebase
Cline is autonomous exploration: the LLM reads files, forms a plan, edits, and iterates, discovering context as it goes. It is flexible, open-source, and bring-your-own-key — but the model is doing the understanding, so tokens scale with how much it has to read, runs take longer, and nothing guarantees the result passes your tests. In a measured 87-task head-to-head, Cline verified 64 of 87 fixes (73.6%) — the rest looked plausible but failed the project's own tests — averaging 64.8k tokens and 72.9s per task at about $0.14 each.
How Codna fixes it
What Codna does differently
Whole repo100,000+
Evidence bundle~600
2
Fix from a tight evidence bundle
The agent works from a ~600-token bundle — suspect files, call paths, the failing test — not the whole repo. That is why Codna averaged 16.2k tokens per fix to Cline's 64.8k (4× fewer).
3
Gate every fix on your tests
A patch must pass your own suite before it ships. That hard gate is why Codna verified 100% of the 87 tasks while Cline verified 73.6% — a plausible-looking edit that fails your tests never becomes a fix.
codna fix . --issue "the checkout test is failing"
What you get
Codna vs Cline, measured
Verified, not just plausible
100% of fixes verified (87/87) versus Cline's 73.6% (64/87). Codna gates every patch on your test suite; an autonomous agent optimizes for an edit that looks right, so roughly one in four of Cline's fixes failed the project's tests.
A deterministic graph, not LLM exploration
Cline spends tokens having the model read and re-read your code to understand it. Codna computes the dependency and blast-radius graph deterministically — zero LLM tokens, about 60ms — then hands the agent only what matters.
Measured: 4× fewer tokens, 5.4× faster, 6.6× cheaper
16.2k tokens / 13.4s / about $0.02 per verified fix, versus Cline's 64.8k / 72.9s / about $0.14 across the same 87 tasks — a shorter path with the test gate on top.
Both self-host — the edge is verification
Like Cline, Codna is bring-your-own-key and self-hostable with fail-closed egress and no training on your code. The difference is not where it runs; it is that Codna verifies every fix and does the understanding for zero tokens.
The proof
Fewer tokens. Faster. Verified.
Frequently asked
They take different approaches. Cline is an autonomous agent that explores and edits; Codna is a deterministic understanding-and-verification layer that can run standalone or feed your existing agent a tight evidence bundle through MCP. The measured edge is that Codna verified every fix (100% vs 73.6%) at a fraction of the tokens and cost.
Autonomous agents optimize for a plausible edit, not a passing test. Without a hard gate on your test suite, some fixes look correct but fail the project's own tests — in the 87-task benchmark that was about one in four. Codna gates every patch on your tests, so a fix that fails never ships.
Measured at about $0.02 per verified fix versus roughly $0.14 for Cline on the same tasks — 6.6× cheaper — because Codna fixes from a ~600-token evidence bundle instead of having the model read the repository to understand it. The deterministic understanding step itself costs zero tokens.
Yes. Codna is bring-your-own-key and runs fully self-hosted with fail-closed egress and no training on your code; the deterministic graph runs locally for zero tokens. You get the open, private setup you would expect from Cline, plus the test gate and the token savings.
Related
