A small group is using agents. Adoption has spread beyond one person but is not project-wide.
Assisted or autonomous
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
Peak month: 45.5%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.
Which agents
| Claude Code | Anthropic | 88 | 19.3% |
| GitHub Copilot | GitHub | 1 | 0.2% |
Verify it yourself
Sample commits that matched. Every one links to GitHub — check the trailers.
d1b6377aMark action promises as handled so fire-and-forget requests don't leak unhClaude Code4c427e7dTighten guard comment and strip trailing whitespaceClaude Code13c62828Tidy attribute filter as an allowlist, add snapshot regression test and doClaude Code41ffc6b2fix: reliable fork PR checkout in Claude workflow (#10259)GitHub Copilot
What was excluded
| Commits in window | 506 |
| Merge commits removed | −48 |
| CI / dependency bots removed | −1 |
| Considered | 457 |
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 livewire/livewire