14.2%

of 204 commits were committed by an AI agent — a floor, not an estimate

14.2% agent · top contributor 37.9%4 contributors

team

A small group is using agents. Adoption has spread beyond one person but is not project-wide.

agent commits

175

human commits

agent contributors

37.9%

largest contributor

Assisted or autonomous

29assisted

0autonomous

Assisted — a developer’s identity authored the commit and the agent added itself as co-author. The agent ran git commit during a working session, with a person there. Autonomous — a bot identity is the author, no human in the loop. Across the whole index, 93.7% of agent commits are assisted.

Agent share by month

Feb26

Mar26

Apr26

May26

Jun26

Jul26

Aug26

Sep26

Peak month: 48.6%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.

Which agents

Claude Code

Anthropic

14.2%

Verify it yourself

Sample commits that matched. Every one links to GitHub — check the trailers.

6cd9ac4dchore(deps): bump golang 1.26-alpine -> 1.27-alpine in examples/http-serveClaude Code
71537a3dchore(deps): consolidate minor/patch dependency updates (2026-07-21) (#375Claude Code
1976a9f5chore(datasource): sync submodules to gofr.dev v1.57.0 and fix standalone Claude Code

What was excluded

Commits in window	440
Merge commits removed	−101
CI / dependency bots removed	−135
Considered	204

Bots are excluded from the denominator entirely. Counting dependabot as “AI-written code” is the fastest way to produce a meaningless number.

How this was measured

Measured over February–August 2026, cloned directly. Detection is deterministic string matching against signatures agents write about themselves — no heuristics, no style analysis. Merge commits and CI bots are excluded from the denominator. The figure is a floor: squash merges strip trailers, so real usage is higher. Contributor counts are aggregate — no individual is named.

Run it yourself: npx qmmit-cli gofr-dev/gofr

Scan another repository

Try