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: 89.1%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.
Which agents
| Claude Code | Anthropic | 1143 | 69.1% |
| Cursor Agent | Anysphere | 1 | 0.1% |
Verify it yourself
Sample commits that matched. Every one links to GitHub — check the trailers.
f4598c01perf(host): reconcile and drain sessions concurrently; fixed-rate deliveryClaude Code5f5cff55test(webhook): allocate free ports from the kernel instead of picking themClaude Code8ef45c85perf(cross-session-context): bound the echo fan to the hot set, off the waClaude Code6e22abb1fix: replace hardcoded /Users/user fallback with os.homedir()Cursor Agent
What was excluded
| Commits in window | 2,790 |
| Merge commits removed | −821 |
| CI / dependency bots removed | −314 |
| Considered | 1,655 |
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 nanocoai/nanoclaw