Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 04:29 UTC

DavideCarvalho / nestjs-telescope

Laravel Telescope-style observability dashboard for NestJS — requests, queries, exceptions, jobs, cache, mail; Horizon-style live queue console; Pulse-style health. Express & Fastify.

TypeScriptMIT★ 5 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindWeb interfaceLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

DavideCarvalho/nestjs-telescope holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (89/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (38/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
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.

67
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 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Davi de CarvalhoPersonal account
67 followers129 public repossince Nov 2015Mobly

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
9/36Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 556 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year556
human_commit_share0.56
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year13

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag@dudousxd/nestjs-telescope@1.29.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases1.5
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?

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
9.8/60Stars — 5 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars5
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
51.3/80Monthly downloads — 7,013 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-ai, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-ui, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-sqs, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-logs, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-mail, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-otel, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-cache
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads7,013
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?

47Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
29.7/30PR acceptance — 113/114 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs113
open_issues1
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
13.2/25Owner reach — 67 followers of DavideCarvalho
25/25Track record — 129 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers67
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginDavideCarvalho
public_repos129
account_age_days3,966
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 8 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history — 44 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-ai, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-ui, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-sqs, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-logs, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-mail, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-otel, @dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-cache
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — biome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://davidecarvalho.github.io/aviary/docs/telescope
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbullmq, dashboard, debugging, mikro-orm, monitoring, nestjs, observability, telescope, typescript
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://davidecarvalho.github.io/aviary/docs/telescope
docs_sitehttps://davidecarvalho.github.io/aviary/docs/telescope
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

41Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 84 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.1
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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://davidecarvalho.github.io/aviary/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 56 of 56 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://davidecarvalho.github.io/aviary/llms.txt
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — biome.json
11/11Static type checking — examples/basic-app/tsconfig.json, integration/memory-soak/tsconfig.json, packages/ai/tsconfig.json, packages/bullmq/tsconfig.json, packages/cache/tsconfig.json, packages/core/tsconfig.json, packages/events/tsconfig.json, packages/logs/tsconfig.json, packages/mail/tsconfig.json, packages/mikro-orm-watcher/tsconfig.json, packages/mikro-orm/tsconfig.json, packages/observe/tsconfig.json, packages/otel/tsconfig.json, packages/prisma/tsconfig.json, packages/redis-watcher/tsconfig.json, packages/redis/tsconfig.json, packages/schedule/tsconfig.json, packages/sqs/tsconfig.json, packages/testing/tsconfig.json, packages/typeorm/tsconfig.json, packages/ui/tsconfig.json, website/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 14 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 19 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsexamples/basic-app/tsconfig.json, integration/memory-soak/tsconfig.json, packages/ai/tsconfig.json, packages/bullmq/tsconfig.json, packages/cache/tsconfig.json, packages/core/tsconfig.json, packages/events/tsconfig.json, packages/logs/tsconfig.json, packages/mail/tsconfig.json, packages/mikro-orm-watcher/tsconfig.json, packages/mikro-orm/tsconfig.json, packages/observe/tsconfig.json, packages/otel/tsconfig.json, packages/prisma/tsconfig.json, packages/redis-watcher/tsconfig.json, packages/redis/tsconfig.json, packages/schedule/tsconfig.json, packages/sqs/tsconfig.json, packages/testing/tsconfig.json, packages/typeorm/tsconfig.json, packages/ui/tsconfig.json, website/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.14
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.19
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/581 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes40,453
source_files_sampled581
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples, recipes
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, recipes
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

5GitHub stars
1contributors
556commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index npm:@dudousxd/nestjs-telescope@1.29.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 04:29 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 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
0Vulnerabilities84 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 23
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@orama/orama3.1.18website/package.json
npmfumadocs-core16.9.3website/package.json
npmfumadocs-mdx15.0.10website/package.json
npmfumadocs-ui16.9.3website/package.json
npmlucide-react1.17.0website/package.json
npmnext16.2.7website/package.json
npmreact19.3.0website/package.json
npmreact-dom19.3.0website/package.json
npmtailwind-merge3.6.0website/package.json
npm@dudousxd/nestjs-telescopeworkspace:*integration/memory-soak/package.json
npm@dudousxd/nestjs-telescope-cacheworkspace:*integration/memory-soak/package.json
npm@nestjs/common12.0.1integration/memory-soak/package.json
npm@nestjs/core12.0.1integration/memory-soak/package.json
npm@nestjs/platform-express12.0.1integration/memory-soak/package.json
npmreflect-metadata0.2.2integration/memory-soak/package.json
npmrxjs7.8.2integration/memory-soak/package.json
npmbetter-sqlite311.10.0packages/core/package.json
npmuuid11.1.1packages/core/package.json
npmzod3.25.76packages/core/package.json
npm@base-ui/react1.0.0packages/ui/package.json
npmclass-variance-authority0.7.1packages/ui/package.json
npmclsx2.1.1packages/ui/package.json
npmtailwind-merge2.6.1packages/ui/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

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm.