Skip to main content
Glama

Report Ai Usage Tool

report-ai-usage-tool
Idempotent

Report that you — the coding agent — wrote or helped write this change, and how much of it. Coderbuds otherwise has to infer AI authorship from the shape of the diff, and a heuristic that decides who counts as an AI adopter is a heuristic that decides where a CTO spends budget. You already know the answer. Say it, and the team's AI numbers stop being a guess.

Call this once per change, after the work is done — ideally with pull_request_number once the PR exists, or branch before it does. Re-reporting the same change refreshes the record rather than double-counting it, so it is safe to call again as the work evolves.

Set authorship honestly: agent_authored (you wrote essentially all of it), agent_assisted (you wrote a meaningful part, a person wrote the rest), or human_authored (a person wrote it and you only looked things up or reviewed).

Then say what you saw a person do before the pull request opened, in review_evidence. Do not judge whether the change was "reviewed" — list only what happened in front of you:

  • approved_each_edit — each edit was shown to a person as a diff and approved before it applied (you ran in a mode that asks before editing, not one that bypasses permissions)

  • diff_comments — a person left comments on the diff before it opened (in Conductor, the GetDiffComments tool returns them)

  • edited_by_person — a person changed the code themselves

  • replied_after_changes — a person replied after the change was finished and before the pull request opened, so they saw at least your summary of it

Pass an empty list when none of these happened. You cannot see a person reading a diff in their editor, so an empty list means "no evidence", and Coderbuds words it that way.

Reports are team-visible and attributed to you. The response tells you whether Coderbuds' own detector agreed with your report; where it did not, yours is the one that counts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolYesThe coding agent that did the work, as a stable slug — e.g. claude-code, cursor, copilot, codex, amp. Name the product the person worked through, not the model under it: an agent running inside Amp reports amp even when the model is Claude, and puts the model in `model`. Free text is normalised, so "Claude Code" and "claude-code" are the same tool.
modelNoOptional model that did the work, e.g. claude-opus-5. Separate from `tool`: Amp, Cursor and others run several models.
notesNoOptional short context, e.g. "agent wrote the migration, human rewrote the query". Max 500 characters.
branchNoThe source branch, for when you report before the pull request exists. Matched to the pull request when it appears.
authorshipYesHow much of the change you wrote: agent_authored (essentially all), agent_assisted (a meaningful part), or human_authored (a person wrote it, you only assisted).
repositoryYesThe repository the change is in, as owner/name or a bare repo name. Also binds the session to the owning team.
human_reviewedNoDeprecated — send review_evidence instead, which this is derived from. Used only when review_evidence is absent.
review_evidenceNoWhat you saw a person do before the pull request opened: approved_each_edit, diff_comments, edited_by_person, replied_after_changes. An empty list when none of these happened.
pull_request_numberNoThe pull request this change became, if it exists yet. The strongest anchor — it lets Coderbuds compare your report against what its detector inferred from the same diff.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
teamYesTeam name.
toolYesNormalised tool slug recorded.
modelNoModel recorded, if given.
branchNoBranch the report is anchored to, if given.
createdYesFalse when this refreshed an existing report for the same change.
messageYesHuman-readable confirmation.
authorshipYesAuthorship level recorded.
repositoryYesRepository the report was recorded against.
review_levelYesWhat the evidence adds up to: inspected, saw_change, unseen, or unknown.
human_reviewedYesWhether the evidence shows a person looked at the code before it opened.
inferred_scoreNoWhat Coderbuds' own detector scored this pull request, or null when there is nothing to compare yet.
detector_agreedNoWhether the inferred score agreed with your report. Null when there is nothing to compare.
review_evidenceNoThe evidence recorded, or null when none was sent.
pull_request_numberNoPull request number the report is anchored to, if given.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / model / description
      Previous value: -"Optional model that did the work, e.g. claude-opus-5."New value: +"Optional model that did the work, e.g. claude-opus-5. Separate from `tool`: Amp, Cursor and others run several models."
    • changedInput schema / properties / tool / description
      Previous value: -"The coding agent that did the work, as a stable slug — e.g. claude-code, cursor, copilot, codex. Free text is normalised, so \"Claude Code\" and \"claude-code\" are the same tool."New value: +"The coding agent that did the work, as a stable slug — e.g. claude-code, cursor, copilot, codex, amp. Name the product the person worked through, not the model under it: an agent running inside Amp reports amp even when the model is Claude, and puts the model in `model`. Free text is normalised, so \"Claude Code\" and \"claude-code\" are the same tool."
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / human_reviewed / description
      Previous value: -"Whether a person actually read the diff before it went up. Defaults to false — report it honestly rather than flatteringly."New value: +"Deprecated — send review_evidence instead, which this is derived from. Used only when review_evidence is absent."
    • addedInput schema / properties / review_evidence
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "What you saw a person do before the pull request opened: approved_each_edit, diff_comments, edited_by_person, replied_after_changes. An empty list when none of these happened.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "enum": [
      +      "approved_each_edit",
      +      "diff_comments",
      +      "edited_by_person",
      +      "replied_after_changes"
      +    ],
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / human_reviewed / description
      Previous value: -"Whether a person read the diff."New value: +"Whether the evidence shows a person looked at the code before it opened."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / review_evidence
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The evidence recorded, or null when none was sent.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / review_level
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "What the evidence adds up to: inspected, saw_change, unseen, or unknown.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "inspected",
      +    "saw_change",
      +    "unseen",
      +    "unknown"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "team",
      -  "repository",
      -  "tool",
      -  "authorship",
      -  "human_reviewed",
      -  "created",
      -  "message"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "team",
      +  "repository",
      +  "tool",
      +  "authorship",
      +  "human_reviewed",
      +  "review_level",
      +  "created",
      +  "message"
      +]
  3. First observed

TDQS

Score is being calculated.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources