Review economics
companion-inc/feynman
Read from the 14 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
≥9%
Attributed
a floor
2
Attributed PRs
12
Other PRs
14
Read
Attributed — the latest 2
The rest — the latest 5
#213 Fix nested web calls to honor live Pi model scope
0 reviews · 44h to merge
#212 release: update pi-web-access to 0.18.0
0 reviews · 1h to merge
#211 Verify live published native installers
0 reviews · 1h to merge
#210 Release 0.3.11 with pi-subagents 0.40.0
0 reviews · 1h to merge
#206 Upgrade bundled Pi runtime to 0.83.0
0 reviews · 2.3d to merge
How this was measured
9% 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; 10 PRs came off an agent branch with no commit attribution, so the real share runs higher.
Detected: OpenAI Codex, 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 companion-inc/feynman 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 companion-inc/feynman — 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