On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 6:39 PM Dan Eble <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2026-06-01 07:14, Luca Fascione wrote: > > Thinking about it, it seems to me that in this case it's probably wise > > to document in the submission which agents' help (name and versions are > > probably ideal) > I would experience "friction" > if I had to describe my local workbench in one line and keep it up to > date. I'm using open-source tools and open-weight models, and something > is updated almost every day. For a typical commit, it might even be > impossible to describe my workbench both accurately and precisely. >
Maybe that's not needed though. On the one side you want a "class", something like "Gemini 3.1", "Claude 4.7", but on the other, could one not just use $ git commit -m "My message" -s Dan -assisted-by $(pick-agent-versions) file1 file2 file3 > Yes, and not just "Is it more work?" but "What is the most appropriate > response?" > It's probably wisest to consider responding to a human, as if it was always all hand-coded. I would also encourage y'all to consider replacing the percentage with the so-called t-shirt sizes metric: S, M, L (mostly human, half/half, mostly agentic). I doubt you'll ever need more than that, per your point it's just a coarse steer anyways. Glad to hear folks find some value in these messages L -- Luca Fascione
