# Pikselkroken/pixlstash — health index 86/100 (Excellent)

> Inspection of the public repository Pikselkroken/pixlstash by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/Pikselkroken/pixlstash
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/Pikselkroken/pixlstash
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/Pikselkroken/pixlstash/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/p/Pikselkroken/pixlstash.svg
- Inspected: 2026-09-10
- Methodology: metrics 2.10.0, report schema 0.34.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 21% | 92/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 17% | 62/100 | Moderate |
| Sustainability & Governance | 23% | 56/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 19% | 86/100 | Excellent |
| Security | 16% | 64/100 | Moderate |
| AI Readiness | 4% | 69/100 | Good |

The weighted overall 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | PixlStash helps you find things in an image library that's gotten out of hand. It imports and tags your images automatically, then lets you search by content or face, sort the keepers from the rubbish, and serve data to other tools (like ComfyUI) with a REST API. Use the desktop version or run it headless as a server. |
| Classification | network-service, cli, library, web-ui |
| Homepage | http://pixlstash.dev/ |
| Primary language | Python |
| License | GPL-3.0 |
| Stars | 86 |
| Forks | 10 |
| Created | 2025-10-12 |
| Last push | 2026-09-10 |
| Latest release | v1.11.1 |
| Commits (last year) | 4,072 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | cross-platform, locally-hosted, picture-management, pictures, python, vue, machine-learning, comfyui, cuda, image-classification, image-database, image-tagging, self-hosted, stable-diffusion, captioning-images, image-editing, docker-image, image-management, image-manager, comfyui-workflow |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| pypi | pixlstash | 1.11.1 | 2,570 |

## Vitality — 92/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 21% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 94/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 30.5 / 36 | 44/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 4072 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 100 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 2 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~0.8 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | last human commit 0 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 62/100 (Moderate)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 17% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 39/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 31.3 / 60 | 86 stars |
| Forks | partial | 8 / 25 | 10 forks |
| Watchers | not met | 0 / 15 | 1 watchers |

### Community health — 92/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (GPL-3.0) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | met | 6.3 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 57/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 45.5 / 80 | 2,570 downloads/month across pypi |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 56/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 23% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 19/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 0.2 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 99% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | partial | 6.8 / 13.5 | 5 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | partial | 3 / 10 | project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 79/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 39.8 / 42 | 95% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 26.5 / 30 | 682/771 decided PRs merged |
| Newcomer PR acceptance | partial | 9.8 / 13 | 3/4 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 3 / 15 | Found 3/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 42/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 3.4 / 25 | 2 followers of Pikselkroken |
| Track record | partial | 8.4 / 25 | 7 public repos, account ~0 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on pypi |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 2 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 139 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 86/100 (Excellent)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 19% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 84/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 15 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | eslint.config.js |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | http://pixlstash.dev/ |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 20 topics |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 64/100 (Moderate)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 67/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 2.2 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 1.5 / 7.5 | Found 3/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2 |
| Contributors | partial | 0.8 / 2.5 | project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 2.5 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5 |
| SAST | partial | 2.5 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 5 |
| Security-Policy | met | 5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege |
| Vulnerabilities | partial | 6 / 7.5 | 2 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 52/100 (Moderate)

Matched the pypi:pixlstash@1.11.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 121 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 12.6 / 35 | 2 affected: accelerate 1.14.0 (high 7.1), click 8.1.8 (high 7.2) |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 10.2 / 25 | 1 affected: ecdsa 0.19.2 (high 7.4) |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 29.3 / 40 | 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 961 days ago |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Exceptional)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 69/100 (Good)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight: agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but its absence must never gate the top of the scale (calibration saturates at raw 91, so 100/100 remains reachable with AI Readiness at zero).

### Agent context & guidance — 80/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | .github/copilot-instructions.md, CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | partial | 34.6 / 40 | 61 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 67/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | eslint.config.js |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | electron/tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | not met | 0 / 10 | no agent-authored commits among the last 100 |
| Automated maintenance | met | 8 / 8 | 6 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 5 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5 |

### Code legibility for models — 79/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | partial | 27 / 45 | Python with type-check config (electron/tsconfig.json) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 52.2 / 55 | 60/1197 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 40/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | website/api/v1.10/openapi.json, website/api/v1.11/openapi.json, website/api/v1.3/openapi.json, website/api/v1.4/openapi.json, website/api/v1.5/openapi.json, website/api/v1.6/openapi.json, website/api/v1.7/openapi.json, website/api/v1.8/openapi.json, website/api/v1.9/openapi.json |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | not met | 0 / 40 | — |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
- Could not fetch npm package 'pixlstash-desktop' from its registry

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt