Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 12:25 UTC

CesiumGS / 3d-tiles-tools

TypeScriptApache-2.0★ 527 stars⑂ 69 forkssince Sep 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

CesiumGS/3d-tiles-tools holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (75/100) and lowest on Security (47/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

75
overall / 100
Good

Software 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.

75
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)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

CesiumOrganization
1,831 followers67 public repossince Aug 2019

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npm3d-tiles-tools0.5.49,342182 days ago3d-tiles

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

75Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence14/52 weeks with commits
16.6/18Commit volume70 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained23 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year70
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year14
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases15 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~98.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count15
latest_release_tagv0.5.4
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases98.9
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.1/60Stars527 stars
15.3/25Forks69 forks
4.7/15Watchers8 watchers
Inputs used
forks69
stars527
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
52.9/80Monthly downloads9,342 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages3d-tiles-tools
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads9,342
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?

74Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 76% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth16 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.757
How it's scored
26.2/42Issue resolution62% of issues closed
27.8/30PR acceptance89/96 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs89
open_issues40
closed_issues66
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.623
closed_unmerged_prs7
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
23.5/25Owner reach1,831 followers of CesiumGS
25/25Track record67 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,831
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginCesiumGS
public_repos67
account_age_days2,513
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history18 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages3d-tiles-tools
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

47Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained23 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

52Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.json
11/11Static type checkingdemos/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsdemos/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes2/361 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes228,887
source_files_sampled361
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesdemos
Inputs used
example_dirsdemos
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

527GitHub stars
16contributors
70commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
15releases
1bus factor
40open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

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).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-07-18 12:24 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 3/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained23 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 21
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm3d-tiles-toolsfile:../build/srcdemos/package.json
npmminimist^1.2.7demos/package.json
npmseedrandom^3.0.5demos/package.json
npm@gltf-transform/core^4.4.0package.json
npm@gltf-transform/extensions^4.4.0package.json
npm@gltf-transform/functions^4.4.0package.json
npmarchiver^5.3.1package.json
npmbetter-sqlite3^11.5.0package.json
npmcesium^1.103.0package.json
npmdraco3d^1.5.6package.json
npmdraco3dgltf^1.5.6package.json
npmgltf-pipeline^4.1.0package.json
npmgltfpack^0.19.1package.json
npmmeshoptimizer^0.19.0package.json
npmminimist^1.2.7package.json
npmnode-stream-zip^1.15.0package.json
npmpino^8.15.0package.json
npmpino-pretty^10.2.0package.json
npmseedrandom^3.0.5package.json
npmsharp0.33.5package.json
npmyargs^17.5.1package.json
All dependencies 39

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 18 direct and 21 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@gltf-transform/core^4.4.0direct
npm@gltf-transform/extensions^4.4.0direct
npm@gltf-transform/functions^4.4.0direct
npmarchiver^5.3.1direct
npmbetter-sqlite3^11.5.0direct
npmcesium^1.103.0direct
npmdraco3d^1.5.6direct
npmdraco3dgltf^1.5.6direct
npmgltf-pipeline^4.1.0direct
npmgltfpack^0.19.1direct
npmmeshoptimizer^0.19.0direct
npmminimist^1.2.7direct
npmnode-stream-zip^1.15.0direct
npmpino^8.15.0direct
npmpino-pretty^10.2.0direct
npmseedrandom^3.0.5direct
npmsharp0.33.5direct
npmyargs^17.5.1direct
npm@microsoft/api-documenter^7.19.24indirect
npm@microsoft/api-extractor^7.33.6indirect
npm@types/jasmine^4.0.3indirect
npm@types/node18.19.115indirect
npm@types/seedrandom^3.0.8indirect
npm@types/yargs^17.0.22indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin^5.38.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^5.38.0indirect
npmc8^8.0.1indirect
npmdel-cli^5.0.0indirect
npmeslint^8.23.1indirect
npmeslint-config-cesium^9.0.0indirect
npmeslint-config-prettier^8.3.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-node^11.1.0indirect
npmglob^10.3.10indirect
npmjasmine^4.3.0indirect
npmmkdirp^1.0.4indirect
npmnyc^15.1.0indirect
npmprettier2.7.1indirect
npmts-node^10.9.1indirect
npmtypescript^4.8.3indirect
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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsnpm.