Review economics
walkor/workerman
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.
≥0%
Attributed
a floor
1
Attributed PRs
99
Other PRs
100
Read
Attributed — the latest 1
The rest — the latest 5
#1159 增加socks5代理身份验证的支持
0 reviews · 36h to merge
#1158 Fix header extraction logic in Http class to account for buffer length
0 reviews · 25.5d to merge
#1156 Validate Host header format in Http.php
0 reviews · 31h to merge
#1155 Fix regex for HTTP RFC 9112 §2.3
0 reviews · 31h to merge
#1154 Add HTTP 431 status for request header fields too large
0 reviews · 32h to merge
How this was measured
0% 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 311 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 walkor/workerman 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 walkor/workerman — 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