Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 00:17 UTC

Webperf-se / plugin-html

HTML plugin for sitespeed.io

JavaScript · HTML · PythonMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2025View on GitHub ↗

Webperf-se/plugin-html holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (28/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

69
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.

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

Ownership

WebperfOrganization
9 followers18 public repossince Dec 2019

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmplugin-html2026.7.04,709283 days agositespeed.iohtmlwebperfwebperf-core

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 3 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence30/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume127 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year127
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year30

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases29 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~27.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count29
latest_release_tag2026.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases27.2
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?

33At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars0
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
49/80Monthly downloads4,709 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesplugin-html
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads4,709
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?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 49% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.494
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
25.9/30PR acceptance113/131 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs113
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs18
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
7.2/25Owner reach9 followers of Webperf-se
21.3/25Track record18 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginWebperf-se
public_repos18
account_age_days2,393
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 npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history28 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesplugin-html
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configeslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests11 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
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?

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.5/2.5CI-Tests11 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/1 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
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

28At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configeslint.config.js
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
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
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
47.1/55Manageable file sizes1/7 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes80,673
source_files_sampled7
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

0GitHub stars
5contributors
127commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
29releases
2bus factor
0open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 00:17 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
6CI-Tests11 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/1 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
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmjsdom29.1.1package.json
npmhtml-validate11.5.6package.json
npm@sitespeed.io/plugin1.0.2package.json
All dependencies 8

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@sitespeed.io/plugin1.0.2direct
npmhtml-validate11.5.6direct
npmjsdom29.1.1direct
npm@eslint/js10.0.1indirect
npmeslint10.7.0indirect
npmserve14.2.6indirect
npmserve-handler6.1.7indirect
PyPIpackaging24.2indirect
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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsnpm.