AIDev aggregates 932,791 agent-authored pull requests across 116,211 GitHub repositories and five major coding agents, plus a 33,596-PR curated subset with richer metadata. The dataset provides the most comprehensive public resource to date for studying how coding agents are adopted and affect developer workflows.

Main Finding

The paper introduces AIDev, a large-scale, public dataset of agent-authored GitHub pull requests (Agentic-PRs). AIDev aggregates 932,791 Agentic-PRs (cutoff: 2025-08-01) produced by five coding agents (OpenAI Codex, Devin, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Claude Code) across 116,211 repositories and 72,189 developers, plus a curated enriched subset of 33,596 Agentic-PRs from 2,807 repositories with >100 stars. The dataset links PR metadata with reviews, comments, commit diffs, issues, timelines, and automated task annotations to enable systematic study of AI coding agent adoption, quality, review dynamics, and risks in real-world software engineering.

Key Points

• Scope and scale
  • 932,791 Agentic-PRs total; 116,211 repositories; 72,189 developers.
  • Curated subset: 33,596 PRs from 2,807 repositories (>100 stars), with richer artifacts.
• Agents covered: OpenAI Codex, Devin, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Claude Code.
• Rich relational schema (available on Hugging Face & Zenodo) includes PR-, repo-, and user-level metadata plus:
  • PR comments, PR review verdicts, inline review comments
  • Commits and file-level diffs (711,923 commit-diff records in curated subset)
  • Related issues and full PR timelines (325,500 events)
  • Automated PR task-type annotations (Conventional Commits categories; GPT-based)
• Accessibility and reproducibility
  • Dataset hosted on Hugging Face and Zenodo with Data Studio SQL interface and example Colab notebooks (links provided).
• Intended research directions (examples listed by authors)
  • Adoption patterns, developer profiles, and practices for effective agent use
  • Code-change characteristics: size, originality vs. reuse, conformance to project conventions
  • Testing behavior and test-to-code churn
  • Review dynamics: which aspects receive attention, agent responsiveness to comments
  • Failure patterns, security risks, persistence of agent-authored changes
• Related literature context: positions AIDev as filling a gap between controlled/benchmarked studies and large-scale observational data on real-world agent activity.

Data & Methods

• Data collection
  • Source: real-world GitHub repositories; dataset cutoff 2025-08-01.
  • Identification of Agentic-PRs: PRs authored by named coding agents (agent listed as PR author) — aggregated across five agent identifiers listed above.
• Dataset contents and sizes (high-level; from Table 1)
  • Core metadata (all repos): all_pull_request (932,791), all_repository (116,211), all_user (72,189).
  • Curated subset (repos >100 stars): pull_request (33,596), repository (2,807), user (1,796).
  • Comments & reviews (curated subset): pr_comments (39,122), pr_reviews (28,875), pr_review_comments (19,450).
  • Commits & diffs: pr_commits (88,576), pr_commit_details (711,923).
  • Issues & timelines: related_issue (4,923), issue (4,614), pr_timeline (325,500).
  • Annotation: pr_task_type (33,596) — automated classification using Conventional Commits taxonomy with GPT-based methods.
• Artifact linkage
  • Each agent-authored PR is linked to repository and user metadata; curated subset has per-PR timelines, commits, diffs, reviews, and related issues to support longitudinal and event-based analyses.
• Distribution & tools
  • Data available on Hugging Face (interactive Data Studio with in-browser SQL), Zenodo DOI, and a GitHub repo with example Jupyter/Colab notebooks for reproducible queries and filtering.
• Notes on methodology implied by paper
  • The paper focuses on observational aggregation (not an experimental intervention). Automated annotations were produced via GPT-based classifiers. The curated subset restricts to repositories with >100 stars to provide higher-quality review artifacts and richer context.

Implications for AI Economics

AIDev enables empirical study of how agentic AI affects economic outcomes in software production. Key implications and opportunities for economic analysis:

• Labor demand and task allocation

  • Measure whether agent adoption substitutes for routine coding tasks and shifts human labor toward higher-level work (planning, review, integration).
  • Quantify changes in task composition (testing, docs, bug fixes) and estimate effects on developer time allocation and complementarities between humans and agents.

• Productivity and output quality

  • Use PR-level outcomes (time-to-merge, review effort, acceptance rates, revert/hotfix incidence) to estimate productivity changes attributable to agent contributions.
  • Explore heterogeneity: do gains vary by developer experience, repository maturity, language ecosystem, or task-type?

• Wage and skill implications

  • If agents automate lower-skill code production, examine potential compression of wages for commoditized tasks and increased returns to skills that remain complementary (architecting, security review).
  • Identify "super-user" profiles who extract more value from agents and the potential for winner-take-most dynamics in developer productivity.

• Platform and network effects

  • Study how agent support across languages or ecosystems (e.g., Copilot rollout examples) affects contribution volumes, comparative advantage across platforms, and entry/exit of contributors.
  • Estimate externalities: increased velocity vs. increased review burden and security risks that are socialized across repo collaborators.

• Review labor and friction costs

  • Agentic-PRs may impose additional review effort and slower merges (as prior work suggests). Quantify the hidden labor costs of validating agent output and potential inefficiencies or bottlenecks.

• Risk, security, and liability externalities

  • Measure frequency of security issues, licensing/infrastructure risks, and persistence/reversion rates of agent-authored code to quantify downstream compliance and remediation costs — important for firms’ expected cost-benefit calculations when granting agent write access.

• Policy and firm strategy

  • Evidence from AIDev can inform organizational governance (when to allow agent commits, required review/testing gating), procurement decisions (tool choice), and regulation (disclosure, provenance, IP).
  • Can inform contract and labor-market policies around automation, retraining, and credentialing for human reviewers.

• Research design possibilities for economists

  • Use temporal rollouts, agent availability shocks, or differential repository adoption to identify causal effects on contributions, time-to-merge, and developer retention.
  • Leverage heterogeneity in agent types and repo characteristics for instrumental-variable or difference-in-differences strategies.

Overall, AIDev supplies granular, repo- and PR-level microdata that can support rigorous measurement of how agentic AI reshapes productivity, division of labor, risk, and incentives in software production — central topics for AI economics research.