Yes. I manually read the diff of every proposed change and manually accept or deny.

I love CC, but letting it auto-write changes is, at best, a waste of time trying to find the bugs after they start compounding.

Yes or running claude code in the cursor/vscode terminal and watching the files change and then reviewing in IDE. I often like to be able to see an entire file when reviewing a diff, rather than just the lines that changed. Plus it's nice to have go-to-definition when reviewing.

Yes, it shows you the file diff. But generally, the workflow is that you git commit a checkpoint, then let it make all the changes it wants freely, then in your IDE, review what has changed since previous commit, iterate the prompts/make your own adjustments to the code, and when you like it, git commit.

Depending on what I'm doing with it I have 3 modes:

Trivial/easy stuff - let it make a PR at the end and review in GitHub. It rarely gets this stuff wrong IME or does anything stupid.

Moderately complex stuff - let it code away, review/test it in my IDE and make any changes myself and tell claude what I've changed (and get it to do a quick review of my code)

Complex stuff - watch it like a hawk as it is thinking and interrupt it constantly asking questions/telling it what to do, then review in my IDE.

I review and modify changes in Zed or Emacs.

Apparently they are, which is crazy to me. Zed agent mode shows modified hunks and you can accept/reject them individually. I can't imagine doing it all through the CLI, it seems extremely primitive.

I use windsurf to check the diff from Claude Code.

If there’s a conflict you just back out your change and do it again.

I just accept all and review in my editor.

that's what lazygit in another terminal tab is for