Metrics · LGTM · L

Landing

What share of AI-assisted work actually ships?

Landing is the share of build-intent sessions whose work reached a merged or published outcome within the follow-up window. It connects the session record to the receipts — commits, pull requests, published documents — so effort and outcome stay in one number.

What it reads

  • Session records (PSF) for the team and window, with their artifact links
  • Repository state: which commits and pull requests merged, and when
  • Published-document state, where sessions produce docs rather than code

How it’s computed

Take a team's sessions for a trailing window, keep the ones that set out to build something, and check whether their linked artifacts landed within fourteen days.

// window: trailing 30 days · scope: one team const sessions = psf.load({ team, window }) .filter(s => s.intent === "build"); // exclude pure Q&A / exploration const attempted = sessions.length; const landed = sessions.filter(s => s.artifacts.some(a => a.kind === "commit" || a.kind === "pull-request" ? repo.merged(a.ref, { within: days(14) }) : docs.published(a.ref, { within: days(14) }) ) ).length; const landing = landed / attempted; // report with n and the trend

How to read it

  • A falling Landing with rising session volume is the classic churn signature: lots of starts, few finishes — look for review bottlenecks or unclear requirements upstream.
  • Landing differs by kind of work. Compare a team to its own history, and read it beside the trend, never as a lone number.

How it gets misused

  • Landing describes a team's flow. Computed per person it becomes an activity score, which the house rules prohibit.
  • Landing is a denominator game — excluding exploration sessions is the point, so agree on the intent classification before comparing anything.