Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-22 15:12 UTC

Fcmam5 / nest-problem-details

A Nest.js HTTP exceptions filter returning RFC 9457 / RFC-7807 responses

TypeScriptMIT★ 55 stars⑂ 2 forkssince May 2021View on GitHub ↗

Fcmam5/nest-problem-details holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Security (100/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (60/100). It was last updated 32 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Fortas AbdeldjalilPersonal account
440 followers162 public repossince Oct 2014

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
npmnest-problem-details-filter1.10.032,5621440 days agonestjsproblem-detailsproblem+jsonrfc9457rfc7807http-errorsexception-filteropenapivalidationretry-after

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

67Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 32 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 121 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year121
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push32
active_weeks_last_year7

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 15 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 40 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~15.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count15
latest_release_tagv1.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release40
mean_days_between_releases15.4

Community & Adoption

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

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
28.1/60Stars — 55 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars55
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicescoveralls.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60.2/80Monthly downloads — 32,562 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesnest-problem-details-filter
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads32,562
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.993
How it's scored
30.8/42Issue resolution — 73% of issues closed
25.6/30PR acceptance — 29/34 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs29
open_issues8
closed_issues22
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.733
closed_unmerged_prs5
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
19/25Owner reach — 440 followers of Fcmam5
25/25Track record — 162 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers440
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginFcmam5
public_repos162
account_age_days4,396
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 40 days ago
20/20Version history — 14 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnest-problem-details-filter
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish40

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.mjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://www.npmjs.com/package/nest-problem-details-filter
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsapi-rest, nestjs, nodejs, rfc-7807, nest, restful-api, problem-details, rfc-9457
has_wikino
homepagehttps://www.npmjs.com/package/nest-problem-details-filter
docs_sitehttps://www.npmjs.com/package/nest-problem-details-filter
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

100Exceptional · 16% of overall

Security posture

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles — published library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
20/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestspackage.json
has_codeql_workflowyes
has_security_policyyes
has_dependabot_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. 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.

80Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.nestjs.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 94 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.nestjs.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.94
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,655
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.mjs
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/52 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes31,235
source_files_sampled52
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

55GitHub stars
2contributors
121commits, last 12 months
32days since last push
15releases
1bus factor
8open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code 0; Skipping github.com/Fcmam5/nest-problem-details: run: internal error: ListCommits:error during graphqlHandler.setup: internal error: githubv4.Query: Something went wrong while executing your query on 2026-10-22T15:12:48Z. Please include `8606:36E455:86FCE26:C4342DE:6ADA27ED` when reporting this issue.); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
11Releases

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.

111222212025-012025-112026-08
Major 1Minor 7Patch 3

Each point covers 2 days.

All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@eslint/js^10.0.1indirect
npm@nestjs/cli^12.0.0indirect
npm@nestjs/common^12.0.1indirect
npm@nestjs/core^12.0.1indirect
npm@nestjs/platform-express^12.0.1indirect
npm@nestjs/platform-fastify^12.0.1indirect
npm@nestjs/swagger^12.0.1indirect
npm@nestjs/testing^12.0.1indirect
npm@swc/core^1.16.2indirect
npm@swc/jest^0.2.39indirect
npm@types/jest^30.0.0indirect
npm@types/node^24.13.4indirect
npm@types/supertest^7.2.1indirect
npmclass-transformer^0.5.1indirect
npmclass-validator^0.15.1indirect
npmeslint^10.10.0indirect
npmeslint-config-prettier^10.1.8indirect
npmeslint-plugin-prettier^5.5.6indirect
npmeslint-plugin-todo-tickets^1.4.0indirect
npmfast-check^4.9.0indirect
npmglobals^17.12.0indirect
npmjest^30.5.1indirect
npmprettier^3.9.6indirect
npmreflect-metadata^0.2.2indirect
npmrxjs^7.8.2indirect
npmsupertest^7.2.2indirect
npmts-jest^29.4.12indirect
npmts-node^10.9.2indirect
npmtsconfig-paths^4.2.0indirect
npmtypescript^6.0.3indirect
npmtypescript-eslint^8.70.0indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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.