← the index
netbirdio/netbird
1.2%
of 779 commits were committed by an AI agent — a floor, not an estimate
1.2% agent · top contributor 33.3%6 contributors
team

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

9
agent commits
770
human commits
6
agent contributors
33.3%
largest contributor

Assisted or autonomous

9assisted
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: 2.7%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.

Which agents

Claude CodeAnthropic91.2%

Verify it yourself

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

  • 9615d2ab[client] Report the remote jobs key in the MDM UI snapshot (#7485)Claude Code
  • 652d5f3c[client] Reuse the profile's account for iOS SSO logins (#7193)Claude Code
  • 85dd3358[client] Add CI check for translation key parity (#6852)Claude Code

What was excluded

Commits in window783
Merge commits removed2
CI / dependency bots removed2
Considered779

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 netbirdio/netbird

Scan another repository