The reason I want it to be marked as such is because I review AI code differently than human code - it just makes different kinds of mistakes.

You can disclose that you used an LLM in the process of writing code in other ways, though. You can just tell people, you can mention it in the PR, you can mention it in a ticket, etc.

So if I use Claude to write the first pass at the code, make a few changes myself, ask it to make an additional change, change another thing myself, then commit it — what exactly do you expect to see then?

I guess if enough people use it, doesn’t the tag become kind of redundant?

Almost like writing “Code was created with the help of IntelliSense”.

A linter or a formatter does not open you up to compliance and copyright issues.

Linters and formatters are different tools then LLMs. There is a general understanding that linters and formatters don’t alter the behavior of your program. And even still most projects require a particular linter and a formatter to pass before a PR is accepted, and will flag a PR as part of the CI pipeline if a particular linter or a particular formatter fails on the code you wrote. This particular linter and formatter is very likely to be mentioned somewhere in the configuration or at least in the README of the project.

Like frying a veggie burger in bacon grease. Just because somebody's beliefs are dumb doesn't mean we should be deliberately tricking them. If they want to opt out of your code, let them.

My last commit is literally authored by dependabot.

But how much AI-generated code? If it's just a smallish function or two while most iof the code was written by hand?

What editor you are using has no effect on things like copyright, while software that synthesises code might.

In commercial settings you are often required to label your produce and inform about things like 'Made in China' or possible adverse effects of consumption.

well if I know a specific LLM has certain tendencies (eg. some model is likely to introduce off-by-one errors), I would know what to look for in code-review

I mean, of course I would read most of the code during review, but as a human, I often skip things by mistake