Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-22 12:53 UTC

ZaxbyHub / opencode-swarm

Architect-centric agentic swarm plugin for OpenCode. Hub-and-spoke orchestration with SME consultation, code generation, and QA review.

TypeScriptMIT★ 451 stars⑂ 47 forkssince Jan 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on Security (58/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
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.

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

Ownership

ZaxbyHubOrganization
3 followers23 public repossince Jun 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmopencode-swarm7.144.518,4647080 days agoopencodeopencode-pluginaiagentsorchestrationswarmmulti-agentllm

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 0 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence30/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume3,928 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 29 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year3,928
human_commit_share0.92
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year30

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv7.144.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.3
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
43/60Stars451 stars
13.9/25Forks47 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks47
stars451
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
56.9/80Monthly downloads18,464 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesopencode-swarm
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads18,464
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?

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 57% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth16 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.57
How it's scored
34.1/42Issue resolution81% of issues closed
28.5/30PR acceptance1,500/1,579 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1,500
open_issues133
closed_issues569
prs_merged_7d37
prs_decided_7d40
prs_merged_30d37
prs_decided_30d40
issue_closed_ratio0.811
closed_unmerged_prs79
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
4.3/25Owner reach3 followers of ZaxbyHub
10.4/25Track record23 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers3
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginZaxbyHub
public_repos23
account_age_days65

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history708 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesopencode-swarm
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configbiome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics20 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent-swarm, ai-agents, ai-coding, automation, bun, cli, code-review, coding-agent, developer-tools, github, guardrails, llm, mcp, multi-agent, open-source, opencode, opencode-plugin, planning, software-engineering, typescript
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 29 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
4.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
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
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages2
unassessed_packages19
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 2 resolved dependencies against OSV. 19 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

86Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history90 of 92 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.978
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes26,605
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstraprunners/swarm-sandbox-runner/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configbiome.json
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice35 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.35
toolchain_manifestsrunners/swarm-sandbox-runner/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
54.2/55Manageable file sizes51/3,659 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes431,099
source_files_sampled3,659
oversized_source_files51
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

451GitHub stars
16contributors
3,928commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
133open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index npm:opencode-swarm@7.144.5; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 47 ⇿
0Stars
47Forks
77Releases

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.

010203040504722026-022026-052026-08
Major 0Minor 20Patch 57
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-22 12:52 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 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 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 29 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@opencode-ai/plugin^1.18.3package.json
npm@opencode-ai/sdk^1.18.3package.json
npm@vscode/tree-sitter-wasm^0.3.0package.json
npmbash-parser^0.5.0package.json
npmp-limit^7.3.0package.json
npmpicomatch^4.0.4package.json
npmproper-lockfile^4.1.2package.json
npmquick-lru^7.3.0package.json
npmweb-tree-sitter^0.25.0package.json
npmzod^4.1.8package.json
All dependencies 21

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@opencode-ai/plugin^1.18.3direct
npm@opencode-ai/sdk^1.18.3direct
npm@vscode/tree-sitter-wasm^0.3.0direct
npmbash-parser^0.5.0direct
npmp-limit^7.3.0direct
npmpicomatch^4.0.4direct
npmproper-lockfile^4.1.2direct
npmquick-lru^7.3.0direct
npmweb-tree-sitter^0.25.0direct
npmzod^4.1.8direct
crates.ioclapindirect
crates.ioserdeindirect
crates.ioserde_jsonindirect
crates.iothiserrorindirect
crates.iouuidindirect
crates.iowindowsindirect
npm@biomejs/biome2.3.14indirect
npm@types/picomatch^4.0.3indirect
npmbun-types1.3.8indirect
npmjs-yaml^4.1.1indirect
npmtypescript^5.7.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 2 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 19 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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 statisticsnpm.