Claude Code Adds a Session Link to Commits — Users Want It Off by Default

A request has appeared in the Claude Code repository on GitHub (issue #66504) whose author asks that the tool change how it behaves when working with git. According to him, every commit message and every pull request description created by Claude Code automatically gets a session link of the form https://claude.ai/code/session_... appended at the end. There is no consent prompt, no warning, and no mention of it during the initial setup — users discover the link only once it has already made its way into the repository history.

The gist of the complaint

The author considers this behavior unfortunate for several reasons. The link looks unprofessional, clutters the commit history, and a developer adds it without even knowing. In open projects it is visible to every participant and to outside contributors browsing commits and PR descriptions.

The proposed solution is to make adding the link strictly opt-in: don't insert it until the user has explicitly allowed it. As the ideal interface, the author suggests a one-time question on first run: would you like to include a link to your Claude session in commit messages?

Alternatives

The request lists several fallback options. The default behavior could be kept, but the setting made noticeable — for example, showing a “don't add this anymore” option on the first commit. Or the link could be removed entirely, relying only on the already-existing attribution line Co-Authored-By: Claude.

The author notes that turning off the insertion is technically already possible: the attribution.commit: "" parameter in the .claude/settings.json file suppresses the link. The problem is that almost no one knows about this setting. Another workaround — a commit-msg git hook that strips out the link — works unreliably: in remote and cloud environments it doesn't always fire.

The request has been given the “enhancement” label and a medium priority. By the time it was discussed on Hacker News (88 points, over a hundred comments), the issue was already marked as closed. The discussion reflects the broader question of just how visibly AI-based tools leave their own traces in other people's repositories, and whether such attribution should be enabled by default.

Source: Hacker News