Review economics
Masterminds/squirrel
Read from the 87 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
87
Other PRs
87
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#375 Nit: Fix InsertBuilder .Into() argument name
1 reviews · 0h to merge
#256 [Masterminds#82] Added FROM clause to update builder
0 reviews · 961.9d to merge
#339 Change to get GitHub to recognize the license
0 reviews · 0h to merge
#331 feat: add remove select builder columns method
0 reviews · 12h to merge
#317 #316 JoinClause with subquery produces wrong dollar placeholders
0 reviews · 5h 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.
“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 Masterminds/squirrel 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 Masterminds/squirrel — 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