Claude Code Review Workflow: The New Fullscreen Diff Panel in 2.1.260

What changed in Claude Code 2.1.260

The main addition for reviewing AI code changes is the fullscreen diff panel. The 2.1.260 release notes describe a panel beside the conversation that shows uncommitted changes as Claude edits. The /diff command toggles it.

That gives you a place to inspect the changing diff while keeping the conversation visible. A useful review habit is to compare those changes against your request: which files should change, which behavior should change, and which constraints should still hold?

Open the fullscreen diff panel

Switch the current conversation into fullscreen rendering, then toggle the panel:

/tui fullscreen
/diff

Fullscreen mode itself predates this release. Version 2.1.110 introduced /tui and the tui setting; /tui fullscreen changes rendering within the same conversation. These earlier details are recorded in the version-pinned changelog.

The distinction matters when describing the update: Claude Code 2.1.260 introduced the live diff panel, while the command used to enter fullscreen already existed.

The eligible release notes do not establish a minimum terminal width, automatic panel opening, navigation shortcuts, or file-filtering behavior. Start with the two documented commands rather than depending on controls that were not confirmed by the publication cutoff.

For broader orientation, the Claude Code guide hub provides a starting point for the surrounding workflow.

A practical Claude Code review workflow

Use three separate checkpoints: define the intended change, inspect the resulting diff, and request an automated review. Permissions belong alongside those checkpoints because they govern confirmation for tool actions.

The following sequence is a recommended working method. It combines the commands established in the changelog without treating the new panel as an approval interface.

1. Define the scope before editing

Give Claude a bounded task and clear review criteria. Describe the expected behavior, relevant constraints, and anything that needs special attention.

For example, a request to change error handling should identify the intended response to a failure. During review, use that requirement to judge whether the edits address the failure consistently.

Keep the request narrow enough that you can explain why each changed file belongs in the diff. If an edit seems unrelated, ask Claude to explain its connection to the task before proceeding.

2. Inspect changes as they appear

Open fullscreen mode and toggle /diff. As Claude edits, compare the uncommitted changes with the scope you set.

A practical inspection order is:

1. Check whether the changed files belong to the task.
2. Read the changed behavior and its surrounding assumptions.
3. Look for omissions, unexpected scope, or unclear reasoning.
4. Ask Claude to address specific concerns, then inspect the updated diff.

Treat this as an ongoing conversation. A precise follow-up should identify the changed behavior that concerns you and the outcome you expected.

The panel shows already-applied, uncommitted edits. Its documented purpose is visibility into those changes; the release notes do not establish per-hunk approval controls.

3. Request review and assess the findings

Once the changes are ready for another inspection, use /review or /code-review. Evaluate the findings against the actual diff and your original requirements.

For each suggested correction, ask whether it identifies a concrete problem, whether the proposed change fits the task, and whether it introduces additional scope. Then inspect any resulting edits again.

This creates a review loop: inspect, request review, resolve findings, and recheck the changed code. Avoid treating either a visible diff or an automated review response as sufficient evidence by itself.

What /diff, /review, and /code-review do

The commands serve different purposes. /diff controls the live panel; /review invokes the review command through an alias.

The 2.1.223 release notes, dated August 6, 2026, establish that /review became an alias of /code-review. This behavior was already present before the fullscreen diff panel arrived.

Review the current diff

The brief establishes that /review and /code-review can review the current diff. A basic review request is:

/review

Starting in 2.1.223, invoking /code-review without an effort level reuses the level last entered. If you want to make the effort choice explicit, use:

/code-review high

Do not assume that leaving out an effort level resets it to a fixed default. The documented behavior is to reuse the previous selection.

Review a specific pull request

The release notes give this pull-request syntax:

/code-review <level> <pr#>

Here, <level> and <pr#> are placeholders for the effort level and pull-request number. The same review command therefore covers both the current diff and a specified pull request.

For related command-line material, see the Claude Code CLI reference.

Understand deep cloud review

The documented command for requesting a deep cloud review is:

/code-review ultra

Separately, version 2.1.260 increased the wait for long-running cloud reviews through /ultrareview and claude ultrareview from 30 to 45 minutes.

Keep the wording precise: this is an increased wait limit for those commands, not a promise that a review will finish in 45 minutes. The release notes also provide no review-specific price, so they do not support a cost estimate for this workflow.

Review changes and approve actions separately

“Review before approval” can describe two different moments: checking a proposed tool action before allowing it, or inspecting an edit before deciding it is ready to keep.

The historical changelog documents /permissions as a way to require confirmation for specific tools:

/permissions

Use that configuration when your workflow requires a confirmation step for a particular tool. At a confirmation prompt, assess the proposed action against the task and your constraints.

The fullscreen diff panel occupies a different point in the sequence. It displays uncommitted changes that have already been applied while Claude edits. Inspecting those changes helps you decide what needs further explanation, correction, or review.

Keep the checkpoints explicit

A useful review checklist separates the questions:

• Before tool approval: Is the proposed action appropriate for this task?
• After editing: Do the applied changes match the requested behavior?
• After automated review: Which findings require a correction or further investigation?
• Before keeping the result: Have you checked the final changes against your requirements?

This distinction prevents an approval prompt from becoming a substitute for code review. It also prevents the diff panel from being described as a control for authorizing edits before they occur.

The 2.1.260 release notes do not establish an “accept all changes” button or per-hunk accept/reject controls. Describe /diff as an inspection panel, and make decisions about the resulting code through your review process.

Rewind fixes and checking restoration

Version 2.1.260 also includes two fixes relevant to undoing edits. The release notes identify incorrect success reporting when checkpoint backups were missing, plus stale file-read tracking after /rewind.

The first fix affects /rewind and --rewind-files. Previously, they could incorrectly report success even though missing checkpoint backups meant no files had been restored.

The second fix addresses stale file-read tracking after /rewind. These are specific corrections; they do not establish that every edit can always be restored under every condition.

Verify the state after rewinding

When a review leads you to undo work, make checking the resulting files part of the recovery process. Confirm that the relevant changes have been restored before asking Claude to continue.

This recommendation follows the failure addressed by the release: a success message had not always meant restoration occurred. Although 2.1.260 fixes that incorrect reporting, inspecting the result remains a useful checkpoint.

Rewind also serves a different purpose from automated review. Review helps assess changes; rewind is relevant when you decide to return from edits. The fullscreen panel supports inspection of the uncommitted changes, while the documented rewind fixes concern restoration and subsequent file-read tracking.

Key takeaways

• Claude Code 2.1.260, released September 3, 2026, introduced a live diff panel beside the conversation in fullscreen mode.
• Use /tui fullscreen to enter fullscreen rendering and /diff to toggle the panel showing uncommitted changes.
• /review is an alias for /code-review; the command can review the current diff or a specified pull request.
• /permissions governs confirmation for specific tools. The diff panel displays applied edits, and its release notes do not establish per-hunk acceptance controls.
• Version 2.1.260 fixes misleading rewind success reporting and raises the wait for long-running /ultrareview and claude ultrareview cloud reviews to 45 minutes.

FAQ

How do I open Claude Code’s fullscreen diff panel?

Run /tui fullscreen in the conversation, then use /diff to toggle the live panel. Claude Code 2.1.260 introduced the panel, which shows uncommitted changes beside the conversation as Claude edits.

What is the difference between /diff and /review?

/diff toggles the fullscreen panel for inspecting uncommitted changes. /review is an alias for /code-review, which reviews the current diff or a pull request; that alias was established in version 2.1.223.

Can I approve individual changes in the panel?

The 2.1.260 release notes do not establish per-hunk accept/reject controls or an “accept all changes” button. They establish that the panel displays uncommitted changes, while /permissions supports requiring confirmation for specific tool actions.

What does /code-review ultra do, and how long can cloud review run?

/code-review ultra requests a deep cloud review. Separately, version 2.1.260 increased the wait for long-running reviews through /ultrareview and claude ultrareview to 45 minutes from 30 minutes; this wait limit is not a guaranteed completion time.