Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 11:18 UTC

Nice3point / RevitToolkit

Toolkit for Revit plugin development

C#MIT★ 179 stars⑂ 27 forkssince Jul 2022View on GitHub ↗

Nice3point/RevitToolkit holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (84/100) and lowest on Security (49/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
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.

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)
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

RomanPersonal account
641 followers15 public repossince Jul 2016Kinship

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
NuGetNice3point.Revit.Toolkit2027.0.2-170 days agoautodeskrevitapitoolkit

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
25.6/36Commit cadence — 37/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 288 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year288
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year37
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 23 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~144 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count23
latest_release_tag2027.0.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases144

Community & Adoption

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

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
36.5/60Stars — 179 stars
11.8/25Forks — 27 forks
3.3/15Watchers — 5 watchers
Inputs used
forks27
stars179
watchers5
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
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
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
58.5/80Total downloads — 421,960 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesNice3point.Revit.Toolkit
dependents—
ecosystemsnuget
total_downloads421,960
monthly_downloads—
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 81% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.809
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
24.4/30PR acceptance — 87/107 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs87
open_issues0
closed_issues14
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d25
prs_decided_30d25
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs20
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
20.2/25Owner reach — 641 followers of Nice3point
20.8/25Track record — 15 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers641
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginNice3point
public_repos15
account_age_days3,747
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 nuget
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 17 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesNice3point.Revit.Toolkit
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

64Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstoolkit, revit-api, autodesk, dotnet, revit
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
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-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
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 1 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
1.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
2.7/40Legible commit history — 5 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.05
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes2,981
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — build/Build.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency 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_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsbuild/Build.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.Roslyn414.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.Roslyn414.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.csproj, source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.csproj, tests/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Tests/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Tests.csproj, tests/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.Tests/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.Tests.csproj, tests/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Tests/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Tests.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/164 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes18,358
source_files_sampled164
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

179GitHub stars
3contributors
288commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
23releases
1bus factor
0open issues
NuGetpackage 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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 27 ⇿
0Stars
27Forks
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.

0510152025302722022-092024-092026-09
Major 4Minor 0Patch 7

Each point covers 4 days.

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 · 2026-10-21 11:17 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 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
3Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetSourcy.DotNet—build/Build.csproj
NuGetShouldly—build/Build.csproj
NuGetModularPipelines—build/Build.csproj
NuGetModularPipelines.Git—build/Build.csproj
NuGetModularPipelines.GitHub—build/Build.csproj
NuGetModularPipelines.DotNet—build/Build.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.VisualStudio.SolutionPersistence—build/Build.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.Roslyn414.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.CodeFixers.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.Roslyn414.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.Analyzers.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.Roslyn414/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.Roslyn414.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.SourceGenerators.csproj
NuGetNice3point.Revit.Api.RevitAPI—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.csproj
NuGetNice3point.Revit.Api.RevitAPIUI—source/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit/Nice3point.Revit.Toolkit.csproj
All dependencies 18

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces—direct
NuGetMicrosoft.VisualStudio.SolutionPersistence—direct
NuGetModularPipelines—direct
NuGetModularPipelines.DotNet—direct
NuGetModularPipelines.Git—direct
NuGetModularPipelines.GitHub—direct
NuGetNice3point.Revit.Api.RevitAPI—direct
NuGetNice3point.Revit.Api.RevitAPIUI—direct
NuGetShouldly—direct
NuGetSourcy.DotNet—direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Analyzer.Testing—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.CodeFix.Testing—indirect
NuGetNice3point.Revit.Extensions—indirect
NuGetNice3point.TUnit.Revit—indirect
NuGetTUnit—indirect
NuGetVerify.SourceGenerators—indirect
NuGetVerify.TUnit—indirect
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 — NuGet.