Do coding agents recommend Rails I18n?
Rails I18n was chosen in 8% of 224 judged internationalization sessions, ranking fifth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
Rails I18n was chosen in 8% of 224 judged internationalization sessions, ranking fifth. It was also raised as a candidate in 1 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in internationalization inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Rails I18n. What an agent actually installed.
One thing to read first: every one of those wins came from a single codebase. That is a result about one repository rather than about internationalization in general, and the splits below cannot separate the two. Treat them as a description of that repository.
The numbers
| Category | Internationalization |
| Sessions in the category | 224 |
| Sessions where Rails I18n was chosen | 17 |
| Install share | 8% |
| Rank in category | 5 of 20 |
| Codebases it won in | 1 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 1 |
| Chosen when considered | 94% |
| Site | guides.rubyonrails.org |
By agent
With 17 wins spread across three agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Rails I18n | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 77 | 6 | 8% |
| Codex | 78 | 5 | 6% |
| Cursor | 69 | 6 | 9% |
By who was asking
Rails I18n does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 36% of sessions asked as senior engineer and 0% of those asked as enterprise team.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Rails I18n | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 54 | 0 | 0% |
| Junior developer | 69 | 0 | 0% |
| Senior engineer | 47 | 17 | 36% |
| Enterprise team | 54 | 0 | 0% |
What Rails I18n was up against
The full ranking in internationalization, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | next-intl | 57 | 25% |
| 2 | Django translation framework | 45 | 20% |
| 3 | Symfony Translation | 18 | 8% |
| 4 | Paraglide JS | 18 | 8% |
| 5 | Rails I18n (this page) | 17 | 8% |
| 6 | i18next | 14 | 6% |
| 7 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 12 | 5% |
| 8 | Vue I18n | 10 | 4% |
What this means
Agents almost never raise Rails I18n without choosing it: 1 sessions raised against 17 chosen. When it gets considered, it usually wins. The constraint is how rarely it gets considered at all, which is a presence problem: templates, framework integrations and pages that answer the configuration and production questions agents actually search for.
Where these numbers come from
The 224 sessions in internationalization are part of a published set of 6,458, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every internationalization run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Rails I18n: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.
<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->
Common questions
Do coding agents recommend Rails I18n?
Yes. Rails I18n was chosen in 17 of the 224 judged sessions in internationalization, a 8% install share, ranking fifth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Rails I18n?
In 6 of the 77 sessions in internationalization run with Claude Code, which is 8%.
Do different coding agents treat Rails I18n differently?
Not much. The three agents chose it at similar rates, between 6% and 9% of their runs.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 63 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.
How often is Rails I18n considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 1 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 17. That is a 94% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 6,458 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor inside 63 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.