Ultra Plan, Ultra Review & Ultracode
Cloud planning, multi-agent bug-hunting, and deep auto-orchestration
- Place ultraplan, ultrareview, and ultracode on the local-vs-cloud and single-vs-many-agent map, and relate each to its local counterpart (/plan, /review, /simplify)
- Launch ultraplan three ways and choose correctly between Execute on web, teleport back to terminal (Implement here / Start new session / Cancel), and View raw script
- Run ultrareview interactively (/code-review ultra, alias /ultrareview) and non-interactively in CI (claude ultrareview with --json and --timeout), and read its exit codes
- Set and unset /effort ultracode, place it on the low/medium/high/xhigh/max spectrum, and distinguish it from the one-off ultrathink keyword
- Reason about cost and availability: which ultra modes spend usage credits, which are cloud-only, and how to bound spend with small scopes and --timeout
The three 'ultra' capabilities push planning and reviewing off your laptop and into Anthropic's cloud, where many agents work in parallel. Ultraplan drafts a plan in the cloud with a rich browser review UI, then lets you execute on the web (opens a PR) or teleport the approved plan back to your terminal. Ultrareview launches a ~16-agent bug-hunting fleet whose every finding is independently reproduced and verified, plus a non-interactive CLI subcommand for CI. Ultracode is a local setting — xhigh reasoning plus automatic workflow orchestration. This lesson teaches all three as a set, alongside their local counterparts (/plan, /review, /simplify), and is blunt about the research-preview status, the cloud-only constraints, and the real-dollar cost.
- 1The mental model: move the heavy thinking to the cloud, and add agents
- 2Ultraplan: cloud planning with a browser review UI
- 3Ultrareview: a verified multi-agent bug-hunting fleet
- 4Ultrareview in CI, and how it relates to local review and the GitHub App
- 5Ultracode and the effort spectrum
- 6Cost and availability: the decision grid
The mental model: move the heavy thinking to the cloud, and add agents
The single-subagent lesson was about delegating one task to one helper in an isolated context. This lesson goes beyond a single agent: the three 'ultra' capabilities are about coordinating many agents, and two of the three move that work off your machine entirely into Anthropic's cloud.
Hold two axes in your head:
- Where does it run? Locally in your terminal, or remotely on Claude Code on the web?
- How many agents? One reasoning pass, or a fleet working in parallel?
The three ultra modes map cleanly onto a local counterpart you already know:
| Ultra mode | Local counterpart | What 'ultra' adds | Where it runs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ultraplan | /plan (plan mode) | Cloud drafting + a browser review UI (inline comments, reactions, outline); execute on web or teleport back | Cloud |
| Ultrareview | /review (local code review) | A multi-agent fleet (~16) where every bug is independently reproduced and verified | Cloud |
| Ultracode | /effort high and friends | xhigh reasoning + automatic workflow orchestration in one setting | Local |
So two of the three (ultraplan, ultrareview) are cloud features: they need a Claude Code on the web account, and they are not available on Bedrock, Vertex AI, Foundry, or Zero Data Retention (ZDR). The third (ultracode) is a local effort setting that turns on deep reasoning and lets Claude spin up dynamic workflows on its own. Keep that split straight and the rest of the lesson falls into place.
Watch out
These are research-preview features — versions and behavior move fast
Ultraplan (v2.1.91+) and ultrareview (v2.1.86+) are research preview; the feature set, pricing, and availability can change week to week. Ultracode rides on dynamic workflows, also a research preview (v2.1.154+). Treat every command and flag here as 'true for the version the dossier was written against.' Always confirm against /help and the live docs for your installed version (claude --version) before relying on exact syntax.
Ultraplan: cloud planning with a browser review UI
Ultraplan hands a planning task from your local CLI to a Claude Code on the web session running in plan mode (Opus). Claude researches your codebase and drafts the plan in the cloud while your terminal stays free for other work. When it's ready, you review it in a browser surface far richer than the terminal.
Three ways to launch:
# 1. Slash command
/ultraplan migrate the auth service from sessions to JWTs
# 2. Keyword anywhere in a normal prompt
plan this with ultraplan: migrate auth to JWTs
# 3. From a local plan: when plan mode shows the approval dialog,
# choose "No, refine with Ultraplan on Claude Code on the web"The command and keyword paths show a confirmation dialog first; the local-plan path skips it because picking that option already counts as confirmation.
Status, shown in your CLI prompt while the cloud works:
| Indicator | Meaning |
|---|---|
◇ ultraplan | Drafting — researching the codebase, writing the plan |
◇ ultraplan needs your input | A clarifying question; open the session link to answer |
◆ ultraplan ready | The plan is ready to review in your browser |
The browser review UI gives you what a terminal can't: inline comments on any passage, emoji reactions to signal approval or concern, and an outline sidebar to jump between sections. Ask Claude to address your comments and it revises and re-presents — iterate as many times as you want.
Three final actions once the plan looks right:
- Execute on the web — Claude implements it in the same cloud session and opens a pull request when done; review the diff on the web.
- Send back to terminal (teleport) — archives the cloud session and drops the approved plan into your waiting local session via an "Ultraplan approved" dialog with three options: Implement here (inject the plan and continue), Start new session (clear context, start fresh with only the plan — Claude prints a
claude --resumecommand so you can return), or Cancel (save the plan to a file and print its path). - View raw script — inspect what will run before committing to it.
Example
When to reach for ultraplan over local /plan
You're about to do a gnarly migration and you want a teammate-grade review of the plan before any code is written. Local /plan analyses-before-editing in your terminal; ultraplan drafts the same kind of plan in the cloud but gives you a shareable browser surface to comment section-by-section, plus the option to have the cloud implement it and open the PR for you. Use local /plan for fast, in-flow planning; reach for ultraplan when the plan itself deserves careful, annotated review.
Watch out
Cloud-only, and it disconnects Remote Control
Ultraplan needs a Claude Code on the web account + a GitHub repo + a cloud environment (auto-created on first launch). It is not available on Bedrock, Vertex AI, Foundry, or ZDR. If Remote Control is active, starting ultraplan disconnects it — both occupy the claude.ai/code interface and only one can be connected at once. Track or stop a run with /tasks (the entry has a session link, agent activity, and a Stop action; stopping saves nothing to your terminal).
Ultrareview: a verified multi-agent bug-hunting fleet
Ultrareview is the cloud counterpart to the local /review. Run /code-review ultra (alias /ultrareview) and Claude Code launches a fleet of reviewer agents (~16 concurrent) in a remote sandbox to hunt for bugs in your branch or PR. The signal-to-noise win comes from one rule: every reported finding is independently reproduced and verified before it's shown to you — so you get real bugs, not style nits.
# Review current branch vs the default branch (incl. uncommitted/staged changes)
/code-review ultra
# Review a specific GitHub pull request
/code-review ultra 1234Before launching it shows a confirmation dialog with the scope (file/line count), your remaining free runs, and the estimated cost. A run typically takes 5 to 10 minutes and runs in the background; verified findings arrive as a notification, each with a file location and explanation you can hand straight to Claude to fix. Ultrareview never starts on its own — only when you invoke it.
Cost is real money, not plan usage. It bills against usage credits: roughly $5 to $20 per run depending on change size. Pro and Max get 3 free runs (a one-time allotment that does not refresh — and a run you stop early still consumes one). Team and Enterprise pay from the first run. Usage credits must be enabled in billing or the launch is blocked (/usage-credits to check). Like ultraplan, it is unavailable on Bedrock/Vertex/Foundry/ZDR and requires Claude.ai authentication (an API key alone won't do — run /login).
Key insight
Why 'reproduced and verified' is the whole point
A single-pass local review can flag plausible-looking issues that turn out to be false alarms. Ultrareview's fleet reproduces each candidate bug independently before reporting it, filtering out the noise. That is the structural reason it costs more and takes longer than /review — you're paying for many agents plus a verification step. The payoff is pre-merge confidence on substantial changes: you trust the list because each item survived an attempt to confirm it.
Ultrareview in CI, and how it relates to local review and the GitHub App
For pipelines, there's a non-interactive subcommand that runs the same review without an interactive session:
claude ultrareview # current branch vs default
claude ultrareview 1234 # a specific PR
claude ultrareview origin/main # diff against a base branch
claude ultrareview 1234 --json --timeout 20It blocks until the remote review finishes, prints findings to stdout (use --json for the raw bugs.json), and sends progress messages and the live session URL to stderr so stdout stays parseable. --timeout <minutes> bounds the wait (default 30). Read the exit codes in CI:
| Exit code | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 0 | Review completed — with OR without findings |
| 1 | Failed to launch, remote error, or timeout elapsed |
| 130 | Interrupted (Ctrl-C) — the remote review keeps running; follow the stderr URL |
Note the gotcha: exit 0 does not mean 'no bugs found' — it means the review ran successfully. If you want CI to fail on findings, parse the --json output yourself; don't rely on the exit code for that.
How it sits among the review options:
| Tool | Where | Depth | Cost | Flags / notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
/review (local) | Terminal | Single pass, effort low→max | Normal plan usage | --comment (inline PR comments), --fix (apply) |
/simplify | Terminal | Cleanup only — reuse/simplify/efficiency, no bug hunting | Normal plan usage | Applies fixes by default |
/code-review ultra | Cloud | ~16-agent fleet, verified | $5–$20 / run (credits) | Pre-merge confidence on big changes |
| Code Review GitHub App | GitHub (org) | Specialized-agent fleet, auto on PRs | ~$15–$25 / review | Team/Enterprise; REVIEW.md overrides; never blocks merge |
The Code Review GitHub App is the org-scale automation: it auto-reviews PRs on creation/push (or @claude review), tags comments 🔴 Important / 🟡 Nit / 🟣 Pre-existing, and is tuned via project CLAUDE.md plus a REVIEW.md that is injected as highest-priority text and overrides severity calibration. It reaches a neutral conclusion and never blocks a merge.
Tip
Bound CI spend before you wire it into every PR
Two levers: scope and timeout. Test on a small change first so you learn the cost shape, and set --timeout to a value that fails fast rather than letting a stuck remote session burn the full 30 minutes. Because each run is real usage credits ($5–$20), gate claude ultrareview to substantial PRs (e.g. by label or diff size) rather than running it on every trivial commit.
Ultracode and the effort spectrum
Ultracode is not a cloud feature and not a model 'effort level' — it's a Claude Code setting. /effort ultracode turns on two things at once: xhigh reasoning and automatic dynamic-workflow orchestration. With it set, Claude reasons deeply and decides on its own when a substantive task warrants spinning up a workflow (tens to hundreds of subagents, capped at 16 concurrent / 1,000 total per run), then deploys one autonomously.
Two properties to internalize:
- It is session-only: it resets on a new session, on
--resume, and on--clear. - You cannot decouple it from xhigh — ultracode always carries xhigh reasoning with it. Drop back to
/effort highfor routine work.
Where it sits on the effort spectrum:
low < medium < high < xhigh < max
└─ deepest; session-only; no token limitPer-model defaults differ: Opus 4.8 defaults to high; Opus 4.7 defaults to xhigh. You can set effort via /effort, the --effort flag, the CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL env var (highest precedence; max is not allowed in settings), or effortLevel in settings.
For a one-off deep-reasoning boost without changing the session setting, drop the keyword ultrathink into a single prompt — it asks for deeper reasoning on that prompt only. (Both ultracode and ultrathink are current keywords, not deprecated.)
A crucial caveat on the workflow scripting API: official docs and third-party writeups use different names for the orchestration primitives — spawn(definition, prompt, args) in the official workflows docs, versus higher-level agent() / parallel() / pipeline() / phase() in third-party writeups. Don't memorize an API. Learn the concepts (spawn one agent → returns a string; run a batch concurrently with a barrier; pipeline batches through stages; no message bus, just string/JSON passing) and read the script Claude actually generates for your version.
Note
ultracode the setting vs. 'ultracode' the workflow keyword
The bare keyword ultracode in a prompt is one of the three ways to trigger a single dynamic workflow (the others: a saved /<name> workflow, or natural language like 'use a workflow'). The /effort ultracode setting is the standing version: xhigh reasoning plus Claude autonomously deciding to deploy workflows for substantive tasks across the whole session. Same word, two scopes — one prompt vs. the session.
Watch out
Dynamic workflows are a research preview (v2.1.154+) and can spend a lot
Ultracode's auto-orchestration depends on Dynamic Workflows, a research preview requiring v2.1.154+. Workflows can spawn many parallel agents (each with its own context), so token spend climbs fast. Workflow subagents always run in acceptEdits mode (file edits auto-approved) with the parent's tool allowlist. Leave ultracode on for genuinely heavy work; use /effort high for everyday tasks so you don't pay xhigh + workflow costs on trivia.
Cost and availability: the decision grid
Tie it together with the two questions that actually gate these features in practice: does it cost extra, and can I even run it here?
| Ultraplan | Ultrareview | Ultracode | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Runs where | Cloud (web) | Cloud (web) | Local |
| Extra cost? | Free within your cloud session usage | $5–$20 / run (usage credits); Pro/Max 3 free, then credits; Team/Enterprise pay from start | No surcharge, but raises token spend (xhigh + parallel agents) |
| Available on Bedrock/Vertex/Foundry/ZDR? | No | No | Yes (workflows run on those; ultracode is local) |
| Min version | v2.1.91+ | v2.1.86+ | v2.1.154+ (workflows) |
| Bound the cost with | /tasks to stop a run | small scope first; --timeout in CI | /effort high for routine work |
A simple cost mental model across the orchestration paradigms: a single subagent preserves your context (it hands back a summary); an agent team gives each peer a full context window (most expensive per agent); a workflow keeps intermediate state in script variables outside the context window (cheaper per-agent context, but it can spawn hundreds). Ultra modes layer cloud compute and verification on top — which is why ultrareview shows you an estimate before it runs and why you should test on a small slice first, then scale.
Track what you spend with /usage (per skill/subagent/plugin/MCP) and /insights (history and trends). The rule that never changes: prove the value on a narrow scope before you turn a paid, parallel, cloud feature loose on a big one.
Tip
A quick chooser
Plan a hard change and want an annotated, shareable review of the plan → ultraplan. About to merge something substantial and want a verified, real-bugs-only pass → ultrareview (and claude ultrareview --timeout N in CI). Want Claude to reason hard and self-orchestrate parallel agents for a heavy local task → /effort ultracode. Just want one prompt to think harder → ultrathink. Quick local feedback while iterating → plain /review; cleanup only → /simplify.
Try it: Run the ultra trio on a small, real change
Practice all three on a throwaway feature branch — keep scopes tiny so cloud cost stays near zero.
- Check your version first: run
claude --version. Ultraplan needs v2.1.91+, ultrareview v2.1.86+, dynamic workflows (for ultracode) v2.1.154+. If you're below a threshold, note which features are unavailable and rely on/helpto confirm what your build supports. - Ultraplan: in a GitHub-backed repo, run
/ultraplan add input validation to the signup endpoint. Watch the CLI indicator go◇ drafting→◆ ready, open the browser link, and leave an inline comment on one section asking for a revision. When happy, choose Send back to terminal and pick Implement here. (If you're on Bedrock/Vertex/Foundry/ZDR, this step will be unavailable — note why.) - Ultrareview: make a small, deliberately buggy change on a branch (e.g. an off-by-one or a missing null check), then run
/code-review ultra. Read the confirmation dialog — note your remaining free runs and the estimated cost before confirming. Confirm whether the fleet reproduces and reports your planted bug. - Ultrareview in CI (dry run): from the same branch, run
claude ultrareview --json --timeout 10 > findings.json; echo "exit=$?". Inspect the exit code and the JSON. Write one line explaining why exit0would NOT be a safe 'merge it' signal. - Ultracode: set
/effort ultracode, give Claude a genuinely substantive local task (e.g. 'audit this module for unhandled error paths'), and observe whether it self-orchestrates a workflow. Then run/effort highand note the difference in depth and token spend. Tryultrathinkon a single prompt for contrast.
Deliverable: a short note that (a) states which ultra features your version supports, (b) records the ultrareview cost/free-runs you saw, (c) gives your one-line explanation of the exit-0 gotcha, and (d) says when you'd pick ultraplan over local /plan and ultrareview over local /review.
Key takeaways
- 1Two of the three are cloud features: ultraplan and ultrareview run on Claude Code on the web and are NOT available on Bedrock, Vertex, Foundry, or ZDR; ultracode is a local effort setting.
- 2Ultraplan (/ultraplan, the 'ultraplan' keyword, or 'Refine with Ultraplan' from the local plan dialog) drafts a plan in the cloud with a browser review UI, then lets you Execute on web (opens a PR) or teleport it back to the terminal (Implement here / Start new session / Cancel).
- 3Ultrareview (/code-review ultra, alias /ultrareview) runs a ~16-agent fleet where every finding is independently reproduced and verified — real bugs only — for ~5-10 min at $5-$20/run (Pro/Max get 3 free; Team/Enterprise pay from the start).
- 4In CI, claude ultrareview blocks until done, supports --json and --timeout; exit 0 = ran (with OR without findings), 1 = failure/timeout, 130 = interrupted — so 0 does NOT mean 'no bugs'.
- 5/effort ultracode = xhigh reasoning + automatic workflow orchestration; it is session-only, can't be decoupled from xhigh, and resets on a new session. Use 'ultrathink' for a one-off deep-reasoning boost.
- 6All ultra modes are research preview and move fast — defer to /help and the live docs for your version, and test paid/parallel/cloud features on a small scope before scaling.
Quiz
Lock in what you learned
Check your understanding
0 / 4 answered
1.Your CI pipeline runs `claude ultrareview 1234 --json --timeout 20` and it exits with code 0. Your script treats exit 0 as 'no bugs, safe to merge'. Why is that wrong?
2.A teammate on Amazon Bedrock asks why `/code-review ultra` and `/ultraplan` won't launch for them, while `/effort ultracode` works fine. What's the correct explanation?
3.After ultraplan finishes drafting and you approve the plan in the browser, you pick 'Send the plan back to your terminal'. What does the 'Ultraplan approved' dialog offer?
4.Which statement about `/effort ultracode` is accurate?
Go deeper
Hand-picked sources to keep learning
Launch paths, status indicators, the browser review UI, and the Execute-on-web vs teleport-back final actions.
/code-review ultra, pricing and free runs, the CI subcommand, and the --json/--timeout flags with exit codes.
Local /review (and /simplify) plus the Code Review GitHub App, REVIEW.md overrides, and severity tagging.
The low/medium/high/xhigh/max effort spectrum, per-model defaults, ultracode, ultrathink, and how to set effort.
The orchestration engine ultracode auto-deploys: 16 concurrent / 1,000 total caps, scripting primitives, and cost discipline.
Plan mode (the local counterpart to ultraplan) and how acceptEdits applies to workflow subagents.