Skip to content


Repository files navigation

reviewdog - A code review dog who keeps your codebase healthy.

reviewdog provides a way to post review comments to code hosting services, such as GitHub, automatically by integrating with any linter tools with ease. It uses an output of lint tools and posts them as a comment if findings are in the diff of patches to review.

reviewdog also supports running in the local environment to filter the output of lint tools by diff.

design doc

Table of Contents

github-pr-check sample comment in pull-request commit status sample-comment.png reviewdog-local-demo.gif


# Install the latest version. (Install it into ./bin/ by default).
$ curl -sfL | sh -s

# Specify installation directory ($(go env GOPATH)/bin/) and version.
$ curl -sfL | sh -s -- -b $(go env GOPATH)/bin [vX.Y.Z]

# In alpine linux (as it does not come with curl by default)
$ wget -O - -q | sh -s [vX.Y.Z]

Nightly releases

You can also use nightly reviewdog release to try the latest reviewdog improvements every day!

$ curl -sfL | sh -s -- -b $(go env GOPATH)/bin

GitHub Action: reviewdog/action-setup

- uses: reviewdog/action-setup@v1
    reviewdog_version: latest # Optional. [latest,nightly,v.X.Y.Z]

homebrew / linuxbrew

You can also install reviewdog using brew:

$ brew install reviewdog/tap/reviewdog
$ brew upgrade reviewdog/tap/reviewdog

Scoop on Windows

> scoop install reviewdog

Build with go install

$ go install

Input Format


reviewdog accepts any compiler or linter result from stdin and parses it with scan-f like 'errorformat', which is the port of Vim's errorformat feature.

For example, if the result format is {file}:{line number}:{column number}: {message}, errorformat should be %f:%l:%c: %m and you can pass it as -efm arguments.

$ golint ./...
comment_iowriter.go:11:6: exported type CommentWriter should have comment or be unexported
$ golint ./... | reviewdog -efm="%f:%l:%c: %m" -diff="git diff FETCH_HEAD"
name description
%f file name
%l line number
%c column number
%m error message
%% the single '%' character
... ...

Please see reviewdog/errorformat and :h errorformat if you want to deal with a more complex output. 'errorformat' can handle more complex output like a multi-line error message.

You can also try errorformat on the Playground!

With this 'errorformat' feature, reviewdog can support any tool output with ease.

Available pre-defined 'errorformat'

But, you don't have to write 'errorformat' in many cases. reviewdog supports pre-defined errorformat for major tools.

You can find available errorformat name by reviewdog -list and you can use it with -f={name}.

$ reviewdog -list
golint          linter for Go source code                                       -
govet           Vet examines Go source code and reports suspicious problems     -
sbt             the interactive build tool                                      -
$ golint ./... | reviewdog -f=golint -diff="git diff FETCH_HEAD"

You can add supported pre-defined 'errorformat' by contributing to reviewdog/errorformat

Reviewdog Diagnostic Format (RDFormat)

reviewdog supports Reviewdog Diagnostic Format (RDFormat) as a generic diagnostic format and it supports both rdjson and rdjsonl formats.

This rdformat supports rich features like multiline ranged comments, severity, rule code with URL, and code suggestions.

$ <linter> | <convert-to-rdjson> | reviewdog -f=rdjson -reporter=github-pr-review
# or
$ <linter> | <convert-to-rdjsonl> | reviewdog -f=rdjsonl -reporter=github-pr-review

Example: ESLint with RDFormat

eslint reviewdog rdjson demo

You can use eslint-formatter-rdjson to output rdjson as eslint output format.

$ npm install --save-dev eslint-formatter-rdjson
$ eslint -f rdjson . | reviewdog -f=rdjson -reporter=github-pr-review

Or you can also use reviewdog/action-eslint for GitHub Actions.


reviewdog with gofmt example

reviewdog supports diff (unified format) as an input format especially useful for code suggestions. reviewdog can integrate with any code suggestions tools or formatters to report suggestions.

-f.diff.strip: option for -f=diff: strip NUM leading components from diff file names (equivalent to 'patch -p') (default is 1 for git diff) (default 1)

$ <any-code-fixer/formatter> # e.g. eslint --fix, gofmt
$ TMPFILE=$(mktemp)
$ git diff >"${TMPFILE}"
$ git stash -u && git stash drop
$ reviewdog -f=diff -f.diff.strip=1 -reporter=github-pr-review < "${TMPFILE}"

Or you can also use reviewdog/action-suggester for GitHub Actions.

If diagnostic tools support diff output format, you can pipe the diff directly.

$ gofmt -s -d . | reviewdog -name="gofmt" -f=diff -f.diff.strip=0 -reporter=github-pr-review
$ shellcheck -f diff $(shfmt -f .) | reviewdog -f=diff

checkstyle format

reviewdog also accepts checkstyle XML format as well. If the linter supports checkstyle format as a report format, you can use -f=checkstyle instead of using 'errorformat'.

# Local
$ eslint -f checkstyle . | reviewdog -f=checkstyle -diff="git diff"

# CI (overwrite tool name which is shown in review comment by -name arg)
$ eslint -f checkstyle . | reviewdog -f=checkstyle -name="eslint" -reporter=github-check

Also, if you want to pass other Json/XML/etc... format to reviewdog, you can write a converter.

$ <linter> | <convert-to-checkstyle> | reviewdog -f=checkstyle -name="<linter>" -reporter=github-pr-check

SARIF format

reviewdog supports SARIF 2.1.0 JSON format. You can use reviewdog with -f=sarif option.

# Local
$ eslint -f @microsoft/eslint-formatter-sarif . | reviewdog -f=sarif -diff="git diff"

Code Suggestions

eslint reviewdog suggestion demo reviewdog with gofmt example

reviewdog supports code suggestions feature with rdformat or diff input. You can also use reviewdog/action-suggester for GitHub Actions.

reviewdog can suggest code changes along with diagnostic results if a diagnostic tool supports code suggestions data. You can integrate reviewdog with any code fixing tools and any code formatter with diff input as well.

Code Suggestions Support Table

Note that not all reporters provide support for code suggestions.

-reporter Suggestion support
local NO [1]
github-check NO [2]
github-pr-check NO [2]
github-pr-review OK
gitlab-mr-discussion OK
gitlab-mr-commit NO [2]
gerrit-change-review NO [1]
bitbucket-code-report NO [2]
gitea-pr-review NO [2]
  • [1] The reporter service supports the code suggestion feature, but reviewdog does not support it yet. See #678 for the status.
  • [2] The reporter service itself doesn't support the code suggestion feature.

reviewdog config file

reviewdog can also be controlled via the .reviewdog.yml configuration file instead of "-f" or "-efm" arguments.

With .reviewdog.yml, you can run the same commands for both CI service and local environment including editor integration with ease.


    cmd: <command> # (required)
    errorformat: # (optional if you use `format`)
      - <list of errorformat>
    format: <format-name> # (optional if you use `errorformat`. e.g. golint,rdjson,rdjsonl)
    name: <tool-name> # (optional. you can overwrite <tool-name> defined by runner key)
    level: <level> # (optional. same as -level flag. [info,warning,error])

  # examples
    cmd: golint ./...
      - "%f:%l:%c: %m"
    level: warning
    cmd: go vet -all .
    format: govet
    cmd: awesome-linter run
    format: rdjson
    name: AwesomeLinter
$ reviewdog -diff="git diff FETCH_HEAD"
project/run_test.go:61:28: [golint] error strings should not end with punctuation
project/run.go:57:18: [errcheck]        defer os.Setenv(name, os.Getenv(name))
project/run.go:58:12: [errcheck]        os.Setenv(name, "")
# You can use -runners to run only specified runners.
$ reviewdog -diff="git diff FETCH_HEAD" -runners=golint,govet
project/run_test.go:61:28: [golint] error strings should not end with punctuation
# You can use -conf to specify config file path.
$ reviewdog -conf=./.reviewdog.yml -reporter=github-pr-check

Output format for project config based run is one of the following formats.

  • <file>: [<tool name>] <message>
  • <file>:<lnum>: [<tool name>] <message>
  • <file>:<lnum>:<col>: [<tool name>] <message>


reviewdog can report results both in the local environment and review services as continuous integration.

Reporter: Local (-reporter=local) [default]

reviewdog can find newly introduced findings by filtering linter results using diff. You can pass the diff command as -diff arg.

$ golint ./... | reviewdog -f=golint -diff="git diff FETCH_HEAD"

Reporter: GitHub Checks (-reporter=github-pr-check)

github-pr-check sample annotation with option 1 github-pr-check sample

github-pr-check reporter reports results to GitHub Checks.

You can change the report level for this reporter by level field in config file or -level flag. You can control GitHub status check results with this feature. (default: error)

Level GitHub Status
info neutral
warning neutral
error failure

There are two options to use this reporter.

Option 1) Run reviewdog from GitHub Actions w/ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN

Example: .github/workflows/reviewdog.yml

- name: Run reviewdog
  run: |
    golint ./... | reviewdog -f=golint -reporter=github-pr-check

See GitHub Actions section too. You can also use public reviewdog GitHub Actions.

Option 2) Install reviewdog GitHub Apps

reviewdog CLI sends a request to reviewdog GitHub App server and the server post results as GitHub Checks, because Check API is only supported for GitHub App and GitHub Actions.

  1. Install reviewdog Apps.
  2. Set REVIEWDOG_TOKEN or run reviewdog CLI in trusted CI providers.
  • Get token from{owner}/{repo-name}.
$ export REVIEWDOG_TOKEN="<token>"
$ reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-check

Note: Token is not required if you run reviewdog in Travis or AppVeyor.


As described above, github-pr-check reporter with Option 2 depends on reviewdog GitHub App server. The server is running with haya14busa's pocket money for now and I may break things, so I cannot ensure that the server is running 24h and 365 days.

UPDATE: Started getting support by opencollective and GitHub sponsor. See Supporting reviewdog

You can use github-pr-review reporter or use run reviewdog under GitHub Actions if you don't want to depend on reviewdog server.

Reporter: GitHub Checks (-reporter=github-check)

It's basically the same as -reporter=github-pr-check except it works not only for Pull Request but also for commit.

sample comment outside diff

You can create reviewdog badge for this reporter.

Reporter: GitHub PullRequest review comment (-reporter=github-pr-review)


github-pr-review reporter reports results to GitHub PullRequest review comments using GitHub Personal API Access Token. GitHub Enterprise is supported too.

$ reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-review

For GitHub Enterprise, set the API endpoint by an environment variable.

$ export GITHUB_API=""
$ export REVIEWDOG_INSECURE_SKIP_VERIFY=true # set this as you need to skip verifying SSL

See GitHub Actions section too if you can use GitHub Actions. You can also use public reviewdog GitHub Actions.

Reporter: GitHub PR Annotations (-reporter=github-pr-annotations)

github-pr-annotations uses the GitHub Actions annotation format to output errors and warnings to stdout e.g.

::error line=11,col=41,file=app/[vale] reported by reviewdog 🐶%0A[demo.Spelling] Did you really mean 'boobarbaz'?%0A%0ARaw Output:%0A{"message": "[demo.Spelling] Did you really mean 'boobarbaz'?", "location": {"path": "app/", "range": {"start": {"line": 11, "column": 41}}}, "severity": "ERROR"}

This reporter requires a valid GitHub API token to generate a diff, but will not use the token to report errors.

Reporter: GitLab MergeRequest discussions (-reporter=gitlab-mr-discussion)

gitlab-mr-discussion sample

Required GitLab version: >= v10.8.0

gitlab-mr-discussion reporter reports results to GitLab MergeRequest discussions using GitLab Personal API Access token. Get the token with api scope from

$ reviewdog -reporter=gitlab-mr-discussion

The CI_API_V4_URL environment variable, defined automatically by Gitlab CI (v11.7 onwards), will be used to find out the Gitlab API URL.

Alternatively, GITLAB_API can also be defined, in which case it will take precedence over CI_API_V4_URL.

$ export GITLAB_API=""
$ export REVIEWDOG_INSECURE_SKIP_VERIFY=true # set this as you need to skip verifying SSL

Reporter: GitLab MergeRequest commit (-reporter=gitlab-mr-commit)

gitlab-mr-commit is similar to gitlab-mr-discussion reporter but reports results to each commit in GitLab MergeRequest.

gitlab-mr-discussion is recommended, but you can use gitlab-mr-commit reporter if your GitLab version is under v10.8.0.

$ reviewdog -reporter=gitlab-mr-commit

Reporter: Gerrit Change review (-reporter=gerrit-change-review)

gerrit-change-review reporter reports results to Gerrit Change using Gerrit Rest APIs.

The reporter supports Basic Authentication and Git-cookie based authentication for reporting results.

Set GERRIT_USERNAME and GERRIT_PASSWORD environment variables for basic authentication, and put GIT_GITCOOKIE_PATH for git cookie-based authentication.

$ export GERRIT_CHANGE_ID=changeID
$ export GERRIT_REVISION_ID=revisionID
$ export GERRIT_BRANCH=master
$ export GERRIT_ADDRESS=http://<gerrit-host>:<gerrit-port>
$ reviewdog -reporter=gerrit-change-review

Reporter: Bitbucket Code Insights Reports (-reporter=bitbucket-code-report)

bitbucket-code-report bitbucket-code-annotations

bitbucket-code-report generates the annotated Bitbucket Code Insights report.

For now, only the no-filter mode is supported, so the whole project is scanned on every run. Reports are stored per commit and can be viewed per commit from Bitbucket Pipelines UI or in Pull Request. In the Pull Request UI affected code lines will be annotated in the diff, as well as you will be able to filter the annotations by This pull request or All.

If running from Bitbucket Pipelines, no additional configuration is needed (even credentials). If running locally or from some other CI system you would need to provide Bitbucket API credentials:

  • For Basic Auth you need to set the following env variables: BITBUCKET_USER and BITBUCKET_PASSWORD
  • For AccessToken Auth you need to set BITBUCKET_ACCESS_TOKEN
$ export BITBUCKET_USER="my_user"
$ export BITBUCKET_PASSWORD="my_password"
$ reviewdog -reporter=bitbucket-code-report

To post a report to the Bitbucket Server use BITBUCKET_SERVER_URL variable:

$ export BITBUCKET_USER="my_user"
$ export BITBUCKET_PASSWORD="my_password"
$ reviewdog -reporter=bitbucket-code-report

Supported CI services

Example: .github/workflows/reviewdog.yml

name: reviewdog
on: [pull_request]
    name: reviewdog
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
      # ...
      - uses: reviewdog/action-setup@v1
          reviewdog_version: latest # Optional. [latest,nightly,v.X.Y.Z]
      - name: Run reviewdog
        run: |
          reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-check -runners=golint,govet
          # or
          reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-review -runners=golint,govet
Example (github-check reporter):


Only github-check reporter can run on the push event too.

name: reviewdog (github-check)
      - master

    name: reviewdog
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
      # ...
      - name: Run reviewdog
        run: |
          reviewdog -reporter=github-check -runners=golint,govet

Public Reviewdog GitHub Actions

You can use public GitHub Actions to start using reviewdog with ease! 🎉 ▶️ 🎉

... and more on GitHub Marketplace.

Missing actions? Check out reviewdog/action-template and create a new reviewdog action!

Please open a Pull Request to add your created reviewdog actions here ✨. I can also put your repositories under reviewdog org and co-maintain the actions. Example: action-tflint.

Graceful Degradation for Pull Requests from forked repositories

Graceful Degradation example

GITHUB_TOKEN for Pull Requests from a forked repository doesn't have write access to Check API nor Review API due to GitHub Actions restriction.

Instead, reviewdog uses Logging commands of GitHub Actions to post results as annotations similar to github-pr-check reporter.

Note that there is a limitation for annotations created by logging commands, such as max # of annotations per run. You can check GitHub Actions log to see full results in such cases.

reviewdog badge reviewdog

As github-check reporter support running on commit, we can create reviewdog GitHub Action badge to check the result against master commit for example. 🎉


<!-- Replace <OWNER> and <REPOSITORY>. It assumes workflow name is "reviewdog" -->

Travis CI

Travis CI (-reporter=github-pr-check)

If you use -reporter=github-pr-check in Travis CI, you don't need to set REVIEWDOG_TOKEN.


  - mkdir -p ~/bin/ && export PATH="~/bin/:$PATH"
  - curl -sfL| sh -s -- -b ~/bin

  - reviewdog -conf=.reviewdog.yml -reporter=github-pr-check

Travis CI (-reporter=github-pr-review)

Store GitHub API token by travis encryption keys.

$ gem install travis
$ travis encrypt REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN=<token> --add


    - secure: <token>

  - mkdir -p ~/bin/ && export PATH="~/bin/:$PATH"
  - curl -sfL| sh -s -- -b ~/bin

  - >-
    golint ./... | reviewdog -f=golint -reporter=github-pr-review


Circle CI

Store REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN (or REVIEWDOG_TOKEN for github-pr-check) in Environment variables - CircleCI

.circleci/config.yml sample

version: 2
      - image: golang:latest
      - checkout
      - run: curl -sfL| sh -s -- -b ./bin
      - run: go vet ./... 2>&1 | ./bin/reviewdog -f=govet -reporter=github-pr-review

      # Deprecated: prefer GitHub Actions to use github-pr-check reporter.
      - run: go vet ./... 2>&1 | ./bin/reviewdog -f=govet -reporter=github-pr-check

GitLab CI


.gitlab-ci.yml sample

    - reviewdog -reporter=gitlab-mr-discussion
    # Or
    - reviewdog -reporter=gitlab-mr-commit

Bitbucket Pipelines

No additional configuration is needed.

bitbucket-pipelines.yml sample

    - step:
        name: Reviewdog
        image: golangci/golangci-lint:v1.31-alpine
          - wget -O - -q | 
              sh -s -- -b $(go env GOPATH)/bin
          - golangci-lint run --out-format=line-number ./... | reviewdog -f=golangci-lint -reporter=bitbucket-code-report

Common (Jenkins, local, etc...)

You can use reviewdog to post review comments from anywhere with following environment variables.

name description
CI_PULL_REQUEST Pull Request number (e.g. 14)
CI_COMMIT SHA1 for the current build
CI_REPO_OWNER repository owner (e.g. "reviewdog" for
CI_REPO_NAME repository name (e.g. "errorformat" for
CI_BRANCH [optional] branch of the commit
$ export CI_PULL_REQUEST=14
$ export CI_REPO_OWNER=haya14busa
$ export CI_REPO_NAME=reviewdog
$ export CI_COMMIT=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

and set a token if required.


If a CI service doesn't provide information such as Pull Request ID - reviewdog can guess it by a branch name and commit SHA. Just pass the flag guess:

$ reviewdog -conf=.reviewdog.yml -reporter=github-pr-check -guess

Jenkins with GitHub pull request builder plugin

$ export CI_PULL_REQUEST=${ghprbPullId}
$ export CI_REPO_OWNER=haya14busa
$ export CI_REPO_NAME=reviewdog
$ export CI_COMMIT=${ghprbActualCommit}
$ export REVIEWDOG_INSECURE_SKIP_VERIFY=true # set this as you need

# To submit via reviewdog server using github-pr-check reporter
$ REVIEWDOG_TOKEN="<token>" reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-check
# Or, to submit directly via API using github-pr-review reporter
$ REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN="<token>" reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-review
# Or, to submit directly via API using github-pr-check reporter (requires GitHub App Account configured)
$ REVIEWDOG_SKIP_DOGHOUSE=true REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN="<token>" reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-check

Exit codes

By default reviewdog will return 0 as exit code even if it finds errors. If -fail-on-error flag is passed, reviewdog exits with 1 when at least one error was found/reported. This can be helpful when you are using it as a step in your CI pipeline and want to mark the step failed if any error found by linter.

See also -level flag for github-pr-check/github-check reporters. reviewdog will exit with 1 if reported check status is failure as well if -fail-on-error=true.

Filter mode

reviewdog filter results by diff and you can control how reviewdog filter results by -filter-mode flag. Available filter modes are as below.

added (default)

Filter results by added/modified lines.


Filter results by diff context. i.e. changed lines +-N lines (N=3 for example).


Filter results by added/modified file. i.e. reviewdog will report results as long as they are in added/modified file even if the results are not in actual diff.


Do not filter any results. Useful for posting results as comments as much as possible and check other results in console at the same time.

-fail-on-error also works with any filter-mode and can catch all results from any linters with nofilter mode.


$ reviewdog -reporter=github-pr-review -filter-mode=nofilter -fail-on-error

Filter Mode Support Table

Note that not all reporters provide full support for filter mode due to API limitation. e.g. github-pr-review reporter uses GitHub Review API but this API don't support posting comments outside diff context, so reviewdog will use Check annotation as fallback to post those comments [1].

-reporter \ -filter-mode added diff_context file nofilter
local OK OK OK OK
github-check OK OK OK OK
github-pr-check OK OK OK OK
github-pr-review OK OK Partially Supported [1] Partially Supported [1]
github-pr-annotations OK OK OK OK
gitlab-mr-discussion OK OK OK Partially Supported [2]
gitlab-mr-commit OK Partially Supported [2] Partially Supported [2] Partially Supported [2]
gerrit-change-review OK OK? [3] OK? [3] Partially Supported? [2][3]
bitbucket-code-report NO [4] NO [4] NO [4] OK
gitea-pr-review OK OK Partially Supported [2] Partially Supported [2]
  • [1] Report results that are outside the diff file with Check annotation as fallback if it's running in GitHub actions instead of Review API (comments). All results will be reported to console as well.
  • [2] Report results that are outside the diff file to console.
  • [3] It should work, but not been verified yet.
  • [4] Not implemented at the moment


Use the -tee flag to show debug info.

reviewdog -filter-mode=nofilter -tee


🐦 Author

haya14busa GitHub followers



Supporting reviewdog

Become GitHub Sponsor for each contributor or become a backer or sponsor from opencollective.

Become a backer