The Index

The Review Tax Index

The claim you will hear is that AI-written code costs more review everywhere. The data says something more useful: the cost is a split — it lands hard on some repositories and not at all on others. This page measures where.

Repositories read

472

Merged PRs analyzed

46,235

Agent-native repos

14%

20%+ of merged work carries attribution

The split

For every repository with a readable comparison, attributed work is measured against the rest of the same repository — same reviewers, same conventions, same era. A multiple above 1x means the attributed side took more; below means it took less.

Time to merge, attributed / rest

71

repos above 1x

173

at or below 1x

0.6x

median

29% of comparable repos pay more review on attributed work; 71% pay the same or less. Middle half of the population: 0.2x to 1.2x.

Where the tax lands

Median detected share across the population is 3% — and that is a floor, not a share: attribution comes only from marks a tool leaves on a commit, so inline-completion work is invisible by construction.

By primary language

SegmentReposMedian detected shareTime to mergeReview rounds
JavaScript1012%0.4x
TypeScript963%0.5x
Python824%0.6x
Go613%0.7x
Rust553%0.7x
Java241%

A dash means the segment has too few comparable repos for that measure to publish — a median over a handful of ratios is noise wearing a number.

By project size

SegmentReposMedian detected shareTime to mergeReview rounds
50k+ stars2373%0.5x
20k-50k stars2332%0.7x

A dash means the segment has too few comparable repos for that measure to publish — a median over a handful of ratios is noise wearing a number.

How to read this

Full method and every limitation: /methodology. Place your own repo against this population: /scan.