Review economics
JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json
Read from the 99 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
—
Attributed
0
Attributed PRs
99
Other PRs
99
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#2902 Avoid LINQ expression trees on .NET 6+.
0 reviews · 2h to merge
#2980 Annotate for trim/AOT (in)compatibility
27 reviews · 30.4d to merge
#1950 Update Newtonsoft.Json project to use nullable reference types
5 reviews · 212.0d to merge
#2472 Fix JsonWriter.WriteToken to allow null with string token
1 reviews · 0h to merge
#2935 Author fuzz tests and fix a comment-related issue
5 reviews · 61.1d to merge
How this was measured
No commit in this window carries agent attribution, so there is no AI-authored share to read here — which is not evidence there is none; tools that only complete code inline leave no commit trail, so the unattributed side includes AI-assisted work; reads 99 of 331 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
“Attributed” means a commit carried an agent’s signature — a co-author trailer, an agent commit identity, or an agent bot account. Tools that only complete code inline leave no such mark, so the other column is “rest”, not “human-written”. Full method and its limits
The badge reads this repo’s current report, so it follows the number.
Tell me when this moves
We re-read JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json weekly and email only when the number changes materially.
Read your own repos
This one is public. For a private repo, run the same read locally through your own GitHub credentials — nothing is installed and nothing is sent to us.
npx @ambera/review-taxWant this continuously on JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json — each pull request paired to the task it came from, and the work graded from its review loop rather than its diff size? Claim this repo in Forge
Browse every repo people have read · Read a different repository