Overview

AI Code Pulse

AI adoption#

Every active repository scanned had at least one AI configuration file. The average ships 2.6.

Config file Share of repos
CLAUDE.md 54%
AGENTS.md 49%
.claude 42%
.cursor 40%
.cursorrules 40%
copilot-instructions.md 22%
.aiderignore 2%
CODEX.md 1%

The most instrumented repositories — PostHog, Superset, Ghost, cal.com — ship five or more AI config files each.

Vendor lock-in is not happening#

46% of repositories configure two or more AI vendors, averaging 2.2 configs per repository. Claude leads at 81% adoption, Cursor follows at 40%, GitHub Copilot at 22%, CodeRabbit at 9%. The default is not picking one tool. It is shipping many.

What teams tell their AI to care about#

Topic Share of instruction files
Testing 94%
Code quality 91%
Architecture 85%
API design 80%
Database 77%
Documentation 75%
Security 69%
Performance 49%

The median instruction file is 3,500 bytes, roughly 100 lines of guidance. 22% are stubs: the config exists but says nothing. Teams invest most in telling AI how to test and least in telling it how to optimize.

The documentation paradox#

Framework repositories ship 25 times more documentation than business repositories — 4,040 KB and 341 docs on average, against 150 KB and 15 docs. Review accuracy runs the other way: 81% for business repositories, 68.5% for frameworks.

Business repositories explain why. Frameworks document what. The reviewer learns more from intent than from API surface.

The YC effect#

Across 43 YC-backed repositories and 240 non-YC repositories in the same ecosystem, YC companies adopt AI tooling at 1.6 times the rate: 56% ship some AI config against 34%, 30% ship CLAUDE.md against 18%, and 26% ship a Cursor config against 11%.

Copilot inverts the pattern — 10% among non-YC repositories against 2% for YC. YC companies pick best-of-breed tools; everyone else uses what ships with the IDE.