Public recordGood
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-11 14:33 UTC
CelsianJs / what-framework
What Framework — Signal-based UI framework. Fine-grained reactive signals, no virtual DOM, compiler-first JSX, islands architecture.
CelsianJs/what-framework holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (87/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (51/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.
77
overall / 100Software health index
Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.
77
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
Score profile
Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.
The weighted overall 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
CelsianOrganization
0 followers8 public repossince Feb 2026
This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.
Package ecosystems
| Registry | Package | Version | Downloads / mo | Versions | Last publish | Tags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| npm | what-framework-cli | 0.13.8 | 1,558 | 41 | 4 days ago | clidev-serverbuild-toolwhat-framework |
| npm | what-core | 0.13.8 | 3,914 | 51 | 4 days ago | frameworksignalsreactiveislandsssrvanilla-jslightweightfine-grained |
| npm | what-framework | 0.13.8 | 3,524 | 52 | 4 days ago | frameworksignalsreactiveislandsssrvanilla-jslightweightroutercomponents |
| npm | what-isr | 0.13.8 | 2,560 | 23 | 4 days ago | isrssrcachestale-while-revalidateincremental-static-regenerationwhat-framework |
| npm | what-router | 0.13.8 | 3,550 | 46 | 4 days ago | routerfile-based-routingview-transitionsspawhat-framework |
| npm | what-server | 0.13.8 | 3,664 | 45 | 4 days ago | ssrislandsstatic-generationserver-renderingwhat-framework |
| npm | what-compiler | 0.13.8 | 3,499 | 46 | 4 days ago | whatframeworkcompilerjsxbabelvite |
| npm | what-devtools | 0.13.8 | 1,591 | 36 | 4 days ago | whatframeworkdevtoolssignalsdebuginspector |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
87
Development activity
79Good
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 1 days ago |
| 15.2/36 | Commit cadence — 22/52 weeks with commits |
| 18/18 | Commit volume — 444 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 444 |
| human_commit_share | 0.66 |
| days_since_last_push | 1 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 22 |
Release discipline
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 27/27 | Ships releases — 15 releases published |
| 36/36 | Release recency — latest release 4 days ago |
| 27/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~7.2 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 15 |
| latest_release_tag | v0.13.8 |
| releases_from_tags | no |
| days_since_latest_release | 4 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 7.2 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
Community & Adoption
Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?
51
Popularity & adoption
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/60 | Stars — 0 stars |
| 0/25 | Forks — 0 forks |
| 0/15 | Watchers — 0 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 0 |
| stars | 0 |
| watchers | 0 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
92Excellent
How it's scored
| 22.5/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (MIT) |
| 18/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 13.5/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 6.3/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | yes |
| has_license | yes |
| readme_badges | 3 |
| has_contributing | yes |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | yes |
| readme_badge_services | shields.io |
| has_pull_request_template | yes |
How it's scored
| 58.4/80 | Monthly downloads — 23,860 downloads/month across npm |
| 0/20 | Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem |
Inputs used
| packages | what-framework-cli, what-core, what-framework, what-isr, what-router, what-server, what-compiler, what-devtools |
| dependents | — |
| ecosystems | npm |
| total_downloads | — |
| monthly_downloads | 23,860 |
| unverified_packages_excluded | — |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.
Sustainability & Governance
Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?
52
Maintainer resilience (bus factor)
14Critical
How it's scored
| 9/54 | Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 2/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 91% of commits |
| 2.7/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 2 contributors |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 1 |
| contributors_sampled | 2 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.91 |
How it's scored
| 42/42 | Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed |
| 23.6/30 | PR acceptance — 63/80 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 0/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 63 |
| open_issues | 0 |
| closed_issues | 5 |
| prs_merged_7d | 6 |
| prs_decided_7d | 6 |
| prs_merged_30d | 38 |
| prs_decided_30d | 38 |
| issue_closed_ratio | 1 |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 17 |
| first_time_authors_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_merged_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_decided_30d | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
Ownership & stewardship
38Weak
How it's scored
| 30/30 | Ownership backing — organization-owned |
| 0/20 | Verified domain |
| 0/25 | Owner reach — 0 followers of CelsianJs |
| 8.1/25 | Track record — 8 public repos, account ~0 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 0 |
| owner_type | Organization |
| is_verified | no |
| owner_login | CelsianJs |
| public_repos | 8 |
| account_age_days | 207 |
Package maintenance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 8 package(s) on npm |
| 35/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 4 days ago |
| 20/20 | Version history — 52 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | what-framework-cli, what-core, what-framework, what-isr, what-router, what-server, what-compiler, what-devtools |
| ecosystems | npm |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 4 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
78
Engineering practices
64Moderate
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 4 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 16/16 | Linter config — eslint.config.js |
| 0/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 0/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| has_precommit_config | no |
Documentation
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 30/30 | README |
| 25/25 | Documentation directory |
| 15/15 | Documentation / homepage site — https://whatfw.com |
| 10/10 | Repository description |
| 10/10 | Topics — 5 topics |
| 10/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | frontend, javascript, reactive, signals, ui-framework |
| has_wiki | yes |
| homepage | https://whatfw.com |
| docs_site | https://whatfw.com |
| has_readme | yes |
| has_docs_dir | yes |
| has_description | yes |
Security
Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?
58
Security posture
47Weak
How it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 0/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| 0/2.5 | CI-Tests — 0 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0/2.5 | Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected |
| 0/5 | Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 5/5 | Packaging — packaging workflow detected |
| 1/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2 |
| 0/5 | SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| 5/5 | Security-Policy — security policy file detected |
| 0/7.5 | Signed-Releases — no data |
| 0/7.5 | Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 11 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 17 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 1 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 4.7 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
Dependency advisories
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 35/35 | Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory |
| 25/25 | Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory |
| 0/40 | No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date |
Inputs used
| source | osv |
| advisories | 0 |
| affected_packages | 0 |
| assessed_packages | 4 |
| unassessed_packages | 0 |
| affected_by_severity | none |
| direct_affected_packages | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:what-framework@0.13.8 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 4 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.
AI Readiness
How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.
86
Agent context & guidance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md |
| 15/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present |
| 40/40 | Legible commit history — 66 of 66 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | yes |
| llms_txt_url | — |
| legible_history_share | 1 |
| agent_instruction_files | CLAUDE.md |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | 18,532 |
How it's scored
| 0/18 | One-command bootstrap |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 11/11 | Lint / format config — eslint.config.js |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — examples/package-demos/06-create-what/scaffolded-app/tsconfig.json, smoke/apps/admin-dashboard/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — lockfile |
| 10/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — 47 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| 5/8 | Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| 2/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2 |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | package-lock.json |
| has_dockerfile | no |
| typed_language | no |
| bootstrap_files | — |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| typecheck_configs | examples/package-demos/06-create-what/scaffolded-app/tsconfig.json, smoke/apps/admin-dashboard/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json |
| agent_commit_share | 0.47 |
| toolchain_manifests | — |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0 |
Code legibility for models
82Excellent
How it's scored
| 27/45 | Type-checkable code — JavaScript with type-check config (examples/package-demos/06-create-what/scaffolded-app/tsconfig.json, smoke/apps/admin-dashboard/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json) |
| 54.7/55 | Manageable file sizes — 4/767 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | JavaScript |
| largest_source_bytes | 157,255 |
| source_files_sampled | 767 |
| oversized_source_files | 4 |
Machine-readable interfaces
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 0/40 | API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software |
| 20/20 | MCP server |
| 40/40 | Runnable examples — example, examples |
Inputs used
| example_dirs | example, examples |
| has_mcp_signal | yes |
| api_schema_files | — |
| interfaces_expected_of | — |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.
Key facts
0GitHub stars
2contributors
444commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
15releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
More detail
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate
Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).
| 10 | Binary-Artifacts | no binaries found in the repo |
| 0 | Branch-Protection | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| 0 | CI-Tests | 0 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0 | Code-Review | Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0 | Contributors | project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 10 | Dependency-Update-Tool | update tool detected |
| 0 | Fuzzing | project is not fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 10 | Maintained | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 10 | Packaging | packaging workflow detected |
| 2 | Pinned-Dependencies | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2 |
| 0 | SAST | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | Security-Policy | security policy file detected |
| n/a | Signed-Releases | no releases found |
| 0 | Token-Permissions | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0 | Vulnerabilities | 11 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 25
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | what-framework | 0.13.8 | docs-site/package.json |
| npm | @chenglou/pretext | ^0.0.8 | package.json |
| npm | what-framework | ^0.13.8 | packages/cli/package.json |
| npm | @modelcontextprotocol/sdk | ^1.0.0 | packages/devtools-mcp/package.json |
| npm | ws | ^8.21.3 | packages/devtools-mcp/package.json |
| npm | zod | ^4.4.3 | packages/devtools-mcp/package.json |
| npm | @modelcontextprotocol/sdk | ^1.0.0 | packages/mcp-server/package.json |
| npm | what-core | ^0.13.8 | packages/what/package.json |
| npm | what-router | ^0.13.8 | packages/what/package.json |
| npm | what-server | ^0.13.8 | packages/what/package.json |
| npm | what-compiler | ^0.13.8 | packages/what/package.json |
| npm | codemirror | ^6.0.1 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @babel/standalone | ^7.29.7 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/lang-javascript | ^6.2.3 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/theme-one-dark | ^6.1.2 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/view | ^6.36.8 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/state | ^6.5.2 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/autocomplete | ^6.18.6 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/commands | ^6.8.1 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/search | ^6.5.10 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/language | ^6.11.0 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/lint | ^6.8.5 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | what-compiler | 0.13.8 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | what-framework | 0.13.8 | sites/playground/package.json |
| npm | what-framework | 0.13.8 | sites/react-compat/package.json |
All dependencies not collected
The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
Dependency advisories 0
Installing npm:what-framework@0.13.8 pulls in 4 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.
No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.
An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.
Raw JSON report machine-readable
Feedback
Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.
Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.
Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.
How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm.