← the index
pranshuparmar/witr
46.3%
of 160 commits were committed by an AI agent — a floor, not an estimate
46.3% agent · top contributor 62.2%4 contributors
team

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

74
agent commits
86
human commits
4
agent contributors
62.2%
largest contributor

Assisted or autonomous

74assisted
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
May26
Jun26
Jul26
Aug26

Peak month: 90.2%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.

Which agents

Claude CodeAnthropic7446.3%

Verify it yourself

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

  • a923578dplayground: anonymous, cookieless visit stats via GoatCounterClaude Code
  • 56b78f1dplayground: make Reset respect the current modeClaude Code
  • 2150214freadme: descriptive banner alt, container in tagline; move PR-check notes Claude Code

What was excluded

Commits in window194
Merge commits removed26
CI / dependency bots removed8
Considered160

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 pranshuparmar/witr

Scan another repository