Different credit usage labels

[Jürgen Höfs]

Hi,

I'm now in my second paid month and observing different infos about my credit usage. 
In the helping page there are no such differences explained and in the example screenshot.
Can someone explain to me where these differences come from?
Thanks in advance!
Juergen

[Dave Mathijs · Accepted solution]

Hi @Jürgen Höfs welcome to the Atlassian Community forums!

Rovo Dev credits are different and separate from Rovo credits. Rovo Dev credits can only be used for Rovo Dev features like Rovo Dev CLI, or code reviews. Rovo credits are used for Rovo features like Rovo Chat, Rovo agents, and Deep Research.

Each skill performed by Rovo Dev (like a code review on your pull request, or a request in Rovo Dev CLI) uses Rovo Dev credits from your allocation. You have a Rovo Dev credits allocation on each Jira instance where you're a member and Rovo Dev is activated.

Average Rovo Dev credit usage

With Rovo Dev Standard, your allocation of credits typically covers 20–75 code reviews, or 5–50 tasks in Rovo Dev CLI.

Don't hesitate to submit a support request directly with Atlassian to get more detailed information about the discrepancy.

[Jürgen Höfs]

Thanks Dave for your infos!

It's now a bit clearer to me.
But of course for me relevant is what I'm paying in the end.
And I have set a max. of 120 Dollars, so it should be the blue number which is relevant for my payment cost in the end, right?

Still confusing then why I' get informed about the other credits with the higher number (...with Rovo Dev CLI) if that's not relevant for my payment.  

[Dr Valeri Colon _Connect Centric_]

Adding to @Dave Mathijs ’s explanation @Jürgen Höfs —the confusion comes from seeing two separate credit systems side by side. Rovo (Chat, agents, search) and Rovo Dev (CLI, code tasks) track usage independently, but only Rovo Dev credits are tied to your current billing cap. The other usage is still shown for visibility, even if it doesn’t directly impact your spend, which is why the numbers can feel inconsistent.

[Jürgen Höfs]

Thanks for your additional informations, that clarifies it for me!