Review economics
knadh/listmonk
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
1
Attributed PRs
99
Other PRs
100
Read
Attributed — the latest 1
The rest — the latest 5
#3175 Improve Traditional Chinese translations
0 reviews · 0h to merge
#3160 Add listmonk Ruby API client
0 reviews · 0h to merge
#3152 i18n: restore consistent European Portuguese in pt.json
0 reviews · 4h to merge
#3136 fix: improve tracking pixel HTML attributes for anti-spam compliance
0 reviews · 3.9d to merge
#3141 Improve Catalan translation
0 reviews · 9h 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; 1 PR came off an agent branch with no commit attribution, so the real share runs higher; reads 100 of 575 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
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 knadh/listmonk 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 knadh/listmonk — 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