making an analysis of the codebase itself, especially with ai, is gonna lead to very subjective results. this website is good because it finds telltale sings, like commit messages. if a commit says "written by claude", you can’t really deny it! not to mention that for someone who doesn’t want to use ai because of ethical reasons, "just ask ai" is not gonna cut it. of course the website is not perfect. if someone hides their tracks, it won’t detect it. and it can have false positives: it’s gonna detect any agents\.md (or similar) file, even one that says "this project does not accept ai-generated contributions" ([example](http://slopscan.ava.pet/repo/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub%2Ecom%2Flibsdl%2Dorg%2FSDL)), and i’ve [seen a case](http://slopscan.ava.pet/repo/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub%2Ecom%2Fsignalapp%2Flibsignal) where it labeled a commit as generated by claude because it came from someone with an anthropic\.com email address (i looked, and this person is not an ai but just an employee of anthropic lol). then, as with any tool, it becomes your job to do your due diligence and check for these sorts of things.