Review economics
chenglou/pretext
Read from the 7 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
≥29%
Attributed
a floor
2
Attributed PRs
5
Other PRs
7
Read
Attributed — the latest 2
The rest — the latest 5
#118 fix: deduplicate isCJK test, remove no-op pre-wrap replace, document empty-string layout
0 reviews · 8h to merge
#58 chore: add repository field to package.json
0 reviews · 5.4d to merge
#103 docs: clarify bidi metadata and rich-path limits
0 reviews · 1h to merge
#25 demo: justification algorithm comparison (CSS vs Pretext vs Knuth-Plass)
0 reviews · 0h to merge
#4 Bump dev deps and allow TypeScript 6
0 reviews · 21h to merge
How this was measured
29% 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.
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 chenglou/pretext 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 chenglou/pretext — 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