Review economics
ueberdosis/tiptap
Read from the 100 most recently merged pull requests ·
Pull requests with attributed agent authorship took only 0.5× the reviews submitted of the rest.
≥5%
Attributed
a floor
3
Attributed PRs
97
Other PRs
100
Read
Attributed — the latest 3
The rest — the latest 5
#8161 refactor: Refactor Decorations API
0 reviews · 0h to merge
#8143 fix(core): repair invalid content before mounting
1 round · 2 reviews · 0h to merge
#8132 Release new stable release
0 reviews · 3h to merge
#8135 fix(react): capture and restore DOM selection when moving contentDOM in ReactNodeViews
2 reviews · 1h to merge
#8131 fix(extension-find-and-replace): current result highlighting in find and replace
2 reviews · 0h to merge
How this was measured
5% 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 1771 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
Detected: Claude Code, Cursor agent, GitHub Copilot coding agent.
“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 ueberdosis/tiptap 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 ueberdosis/tiptap — 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