Public recordGood
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-11 23:20 UTC
Pipelex / vscode-pipelex
Editing support for MTHDS: a VS Code and Cursor extension, a language server, and the plxt CLI that formats and lints .mthds files.
Pipelex/vscode-pipelex holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (95/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (26/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.
65
overall / 100Software 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.
65
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)
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
PipelexOrganization · verified domain
51 followers25 public repossince Sep 2023
This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.
Package ecosystems
| Registry | Package | Version | Downloads / mo | Versions | Last publish | Tags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | pipelex-tools | 0.11.0 | 8,862 | 23 | 0 days ago | tomlmthdspipelexlinterformatter |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
66
Development activity
83Excellent
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 0 days ago |
| 18.7/36 | Commit cadence — 27/52 weeks with commits |
| 18/18 | Commit volume — 482 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 482 |
| human_commit_share | 1 |
| days_since_last_push | 0 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 27 |
Release discipline
40Weak
How it's scored
| 16.2/27 | Ships releases — 3 version tags (no GitHub releases) |
| 7.2/36 | Release recency — latest release 506 days ago |
| 12.6/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~157.3 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 3 |
| latest_release_tag | 0.10.0 |
| releases_from_tags | yes |
| days_since_latest_release | 506 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 157.3 |
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?
26
Popularity & adoption
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/60 | Stars — 0 stars |
| 0/25 | Forks — 0 forks |
| 0/15 | Watchers — 0 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 0 |
| stars | 0 |
| watchers | 0 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
25At Risk
How it's scored
| 0/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (MIT) |
| 0/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 0/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 0/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | no |
| has_license | no |
| readme_badges | 2 |
| has_contributing | no |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | github.com, shields.io |
| has_pull_request_template | no |
How it's scored
| 52.6/80 | Monthly downloads — 8,862 downloads/month across pypi |
| 0/20 | Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem |
Inputs used
| packages | pipelex-tools |
| dependents | — |
| ecosystems | pypi |
| total_downloads | — |
| monthly_downloads | 8,862 |
| 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?
74
Maintainer resilience (bus factor)
60Moderate
How it's scored
| 25.2/54 | Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 11.6/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 48% of commits |
| 13.5/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 65 contributors |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 21 contributing companies or organizations |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 2 |
| contributors_sampled | 65 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.485 |
Issue & PR responsiveness
63Moderate
How it's scored
| 0/42 | Issue resolution — no issues or no data |
| 28.5/30 | PR acceptance — 115/121 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 0/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 115 |
| open_issues | 0 |
| closed_issues | 0 |
| prs_merged_7d | 16 |
| prs_decided_7d | 16 |
| prs_merged_30d | 34 |
| prs_decided_30d | 34 |
| issue_closed_ratio | — |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 6 |
| first_time_authors_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_merged_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_decided_30d | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
Ownership & stewardship
79Good
How it's scored
| 30/30 | Ownership backing — organization-owned |
| 20/20 | Verified domain |
| 12.3/25 | Owner reach — 51 followers of Pipelex |
| 16.5/25 | Track record — 25 public repos, account ~3 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 51 |
| owner_type | Organization |
| is_verified | yes |
| owner_login | Pipelex |
| public_repos | 25 |
| account_age_days | 1,130 |
Package maintenance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi |
| 35/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago |
| 20/20 | Version history — 23 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | pipelex-tools |
| ecosystems | pypi |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 0 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
70
Engineering practices
84Excellent
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 6 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 16/16 | Linter config — Cargo.toml ([workspace.lints]), rustfmt.toml |
| 0/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 25 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| has_precommit_config | no |
Documentation
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 0/30 | README |
| 25/25 | Documentation directory |
| 15/15 | Documentation / homepage site — https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Pipelex.pipelex |
| 0/10 | Repository description |
| 10/10 | Topics — 8 topics |
| 0/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | cursor, language-server, lsp, mthds, pipelex, rust, toml, vscode-extension |
| has_wiki | no |
| homepage | https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Pipelex.pipelex |
| docs_site | https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Pipelex.pipelex |
| has_readme | no |
| has_docs_dir | yes |
| has_description | no |
Security
Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?
45
Security posture
45Weak
How it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 3/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 25 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 2.5/2.5 | Contributors — project has 21 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 0/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected |
| 0/5 | Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 5/5 | Packaging — packaging workflow detected |
| 3/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
| 0/5 | SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0/5 | Security-Policy — security policy file not detected |
| 0/7.5 | Signed-Releases — no data |
| 0/7.5 | Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 146 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 17 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 1 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 4.5 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.
95
Agent context & guidance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| 15/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.pipelex.com/llms.txt) |
| 40/40 | Legible commit history — 96 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | yes |
| llms_txt_url | https://docs.pipelex.com/llms.txt |
| legible_history_share | 0.96 |
| agent_instruction_files | AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | 22,884 |
Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)
88Excellent
How it's scored
| 18/18 | One-command bootstrap — Makefile |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 11/11 | Lint / format config — Cargo.toml ([workspace.lints]), rustfmt.toml |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — crates/pipelex-py/py.typed, editors/vscode/tsconfig.json, js/cli/tsconfig.json, js/lib/tsconfig.json, js/lsp/tsconfig.json, js/tools-wasm/tsconfig.json, site/tsconfig.json |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile |
| 10/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — 85 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| 0/8 | Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed |
| 6/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | Cargo.lock, yarn.lock |
| has_dockerfile | yes |
| typed_language | yes |
| bootstrap_files | Makefile |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| typecheck_configs | crates/pipelex-py/py.typed, editors/vscode/tsconfig.json, js/cli/tsconfig.json, js/lib/tsconfig.json, js/lsp/tsconfig.json, js/tools-wasm/tsconfig.json, site/tsconfig.json |
| agent_commit_share | 0.85 |
| toolchain_manifests | Cargo.toml, crates/lsp-async-stub/Cargo.toml, crates/pipelex-cli/Cargo.toml, crates/pipelex-common/Cargo.toml, crates/pipelex-lsp/Cargo.toml, crates/pipelex-py/Cargo.toml, crates/pipelex-tools-wasm/Cargo.toml, crates/pipelex-wasm/Cargo.toml, crates/taplo-cli/Cargo.toml, crates/taplo-common/Cargo.toml, crates/taplo-lsp/Cargo.toml, crates/taplo-wasm/Cargo.toml, crates/taplo/Cargo.toml, util/test-gen/Cargo.toml |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0 |
Code legibility for models
99Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed) |
| 53.9/55 | Manageable file sizes — 5/261 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Rust |
| largest_source_bytes | 2,733,890 |
| source_files_sampled | 261 |
| oversized_source_files | 5 |
Machine-readable interfaces
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 0/40 | API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software |
| 0/20 | MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software |
| 40/40 | Runnable examples — examples |
Inputs used
| example_dirs | examples |
| has_mcp_signal | no |
| 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
0GitHub stars
65contributors
482commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
3releases
2bus factor
0open issues
crates.io, npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- Community profile unavailable
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
- deps.dev does not index pypi:pipelex-tools@0.11.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead
More detail
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate
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).
| 10 | Binary-Artifacts | no binaries found in the repo |
| 4 | Branch-Protection | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 25 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0 | Code-Review | Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | Contributors | project has 21 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 0 | Dependency-Update-Tool | no update tool detected |
| 0 | Fuzzing | project is not fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 10 | Maintained | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 10 | Packaging | packaging workflow detected |
| 6 | Pinned-Dependencies | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
| 0 | SAST | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0 | Security-Policy | security policy file not detected |
| n/a | Signed-Releases | no releases found |
| 0 | Token-Permissions | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0 | Vulnerabilities | 146 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 12
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | @codemirror/language | ^6.10.0 | site/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/legacy-modes | ^6.3.3 | site/package.json |
| npm | @codemirror/theme-one-dark | ^6.1.2 | site/package.json |
| npm | @taplo/lib | ^0.5.0 | site/package.json |
| npm | @taplo/lsp | ^0.8.0 | site/package.json |
| npm | @types/marked | ^6.0.0 | site/package.json |
| npm | @types/node | ^20.11.15 | site/package.json |
| npm | @vueuse/core | ^8.9.4 | site/package.json |
| npm | codemirror | ^6.0.1 | site/package.json |
| npm | marked | ^4.3.0 | site/package.json |
| npm | vscode-languageserver-protocol | ^3.17.5 | site/package.json |
| npm | vue-codemirror | ^6.1.1 | site/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.
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 — PyPI.