Review economics
Homebrew/brew
Read from the 100 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
≥1%
Attributed
a floor
2
Attributed PRs
98
Other PRs
100
Read
Attributed — the latest 2
The rest — the latest 5
#23437 sorbet files update
1 reviews · 1h to merge
#23436 system_config: show core cask tap output on Linux
1 reviews · 1h to merge
#23414 unpack_strategy/dmg: use `diskutil image` on macOS 14+
7 reviews · 22h to merge
#23435 Speed up `brew style` and `brew readall`
3 reviews · 2h to merge
#23429 Use codesign to sign patched binaries on Intel
2 reviews · 4h to merge
How this was measured
1% of merged commits carry agent attribution — a floor, not the share; tools that only complete code inline leave no commit trail, so the unattributed side includes AI-assisted work; reads 100 of 15133 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
Detected: Claude Code.
“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 Homebrew/brew 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 Homebrew/brew — 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