Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-28 06:30 UTC

Dicklesworthstone / destructive_command_guard

The Destructive Command Guard (dcg) is for blocking dangerous git and shell commands from being executed by agents.

RustCustom license★ 5,853 stars⑂ 239 forkssince Jan 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolTerminal interfaceLibraryhow this is determined

Dicklesworthstone/destructive_command_guard holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on Security (49/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

81
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Jeff EmanuelPersonal account
3,218 followers203 public repossince Jan 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iodestructive_command_guard0.13.063103 days agoclaudedestructiveguardhooksafetycommand-line-utilitiesdevelopment-tools

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

91Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
22.8/36Commit cadence33/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume2,223 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year2,223
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year33

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases66 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.3 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count66
latest_release_tagv0.13.9
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.3

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

58Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars5,853 stars
19.8/25Forks239 forks
7.5/15Watchers23 watchers
Inputs used
forks239
stars5,853
watchers23
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
24.1/80Monthly downloads63 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdestructive_command_guard
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads353
monthly_downloads63
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?

53Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
2.5/30PR acceptance11/131 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/8 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs11
open_issues0
closed_issues224
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d9
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs120
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d8
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach3,218 followers of Dicklesworthstone
25/25Track record203 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,218
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginDicklesworthstone
public_repos203
account_age_days3,159
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 crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history10 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdestructive_command_guard
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows10 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configCargo.toml ([lints])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/destructive_command_guard
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsai-agents, cli, developer-tools, rust, safety, git
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/destructive_command_guard
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

49Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 30 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
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
2/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging. 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.

89Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, docs/agents.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://code.visualstudio.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history100 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://code.visualstudio.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, docs/agents.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes71,802
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, patches/uring-fs/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configCargo.toml ([lints])
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, patches/uring-fs/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
49/55Manageable file sizes33/302 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes1,479,189
source_files_sampled302
oversized_source_files33
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 examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

5,853GitHub stars
1contributors
2,223commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
66releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage 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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 239 ⇿
0Stars
239Forks
64Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

04080120160200240239352026-012026-052026-08
Major 0Minor 10Patch 54
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-28 06:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 30 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
0SASTno SAST tool detected
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 44
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioserde1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioschemars1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_yaml0.9Cargo.toml
crates.iotoml1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotoml_edit0.25Cargo.toml
crates.iochrono0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iofancy-regex0.19Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1.10Cargo.toml
crates.iomemchr2.8Cargo.toml
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iosmallvec1.15.1Cargo.toml
crates.iocolored3.1Cargo.toml
crates.iodirs6.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioglob0.3Cargo.toml
crates.ioshell-words1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4.5Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap_complete4.6Cargo.toml
crates.ioonce_cell1.19Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.23Cargo.toml
crates.ioasync-trait0.1.89Cargo.toml
crates.iorust-mcp-sdk1.0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.52Cargo.toml
crates.iorayon1.11Cargo.toml
crates.ioast-grep-core0.45Cargo.toml
crates.ioast-grep-language0.45Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing-subscriber0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.11Cargo.toml
crates.iohmac0.13Cargo.toml
crates.iofs20.4Cargo.toml
crates.iorusqlite0.40.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioctrlc3.5.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioflate21.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioself_update1.0.0-rc.5Cargo.toml
crates.iosemver1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioratatui0.30Cargo.toml
crates.ioindicatif0.18Cargo.toml
crates.ioconsole0.16Cargo.toml
crates.ioinquire0.9Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.10Cargo.toml
crates.iotru0.2.2Cargo.toml
crates.iorich_rust0.2.2Cargo.toml
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 statisticscrates.io.