Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 01:08 UTC

ai / better-node-test

The CLI shortcut for node --test runner with TypeScript

JavaScriptMIT★ 27 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Sep 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

ai/better-node-test holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Vitality (60/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (40/100). It was last updated 54 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

34
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

34
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

Andrey SitnikPersonal account
10,142 followers103 public repossince Aug 2008@evilmartians

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
npmbetter-node-test1.0.03,3162154 days agonodetesttypescript

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

60Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 54 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
13.3/18Commit volume29 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained7 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year29
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push54
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases11 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 54 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~79.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count11
latest_release_tag1.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release54
mean_days_between_releases79.3
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?

41Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
23/60Stars27 stars
0/25Forks2 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars27
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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
46.9/80Monthly downloads3,316 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbetter-node-test
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads3,316
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 98% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.98
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution0% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance2/2 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs2
open_issues1
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs0
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 backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach10,142 followers of ai
25/25Track record103 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers10,142
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginai
public_repos103
account_age_days6,618
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 54 days ago
20/20Version history21 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbetter-node-test
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish54

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
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?

47Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
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
3.8/7.5Maintained7 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.9
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier75
security_posture_after_multiplier37
security_posture_before_jurisdiction49
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

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
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages131
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1
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 131 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

40Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.1/40Legible commit history2 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.02
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 99
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/10 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes3,153
source_files_sampled10
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

27GitHub stars
2contributors
29commits, last 12 months
54days since last push
11releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
5Releases

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.

111222212023-092024-092025-08
Major 0Minor 2Patch 3

Each point covers 2 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 · 2026-09-16 01:08 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained7 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 131

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 131 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@eslint-community/eslint-utils4.10.1indirect
npm@eslint-community/regexpp4.12.2indirect
npm@eslint/config-array0.23.5indirect
npm@eslint/config-helpers0.6.0indirect
npm@eslint/core1.2.1indirect
npm@eslint/object-schema3.0.5indirect
npm@eslint/plugin-kit0.7.2indirect
npm@humanfs/core0.19.2indirect
npm@humanfs/node0.16.8indirect
npm@humanfs/types0.15.0indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/module-importer1.0.1indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/retry0.4.3indirect
npm@logux/oxc-configs1.0.0indirect
npm@oxlint-tsgolint/darwin-arm647.0.2001indirect
npm@oxlint-tsgolint/darwin-x647.0.2001indirect
npm@oxlint-tsgolint/linux-arm647.0.2001indirect
npm@oxlint-tsgolint/linux-x647.0.2001indirect
npm@oxlint-tsgolint/win32-arm647.0.2001indirect
npm@oxlint-tsgolint/win32-x647.0.2001indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-android-arm-eabi1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-android-arm641.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-darwin-arm641.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-darwin-x641.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-freebsd-x641.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm-gnueabihf1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm-musleabihf1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm64-gnu1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm64-musl1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-ppc64-gnu1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-riscv64-gnu1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-riscv64-musl1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-s390x-gnu1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-x64-gnu1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-x64-musl1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-openharmony-arm641.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-win32-arm64-msvc1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-win32-ia32-msvc1.75.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-win32-x64-msvc1.75.0indirect
npm@types/esrecurse4.3.1indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.9indirect
npm@types/json-schema7.0.15indirect
npm@types/node26.1.1indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-aix-ppc647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-darwin-arm647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-darwin-x647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-freebsd-arm647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-freebsd-x647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-arm7.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-arm647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-loong647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-mips64el7.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-ppc647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-riscv647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-s390x7.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-linux-x647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-netbsd-arm647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-netbsd-x647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-openbsd-arm647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-openbsd-x647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-sunos-x647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-win32-arm647.0.2indirect
npm@typescript/typescript-win32-x647.0.2indirect
npmacorn8.17.0indirect
npmacorn-jsx5.3.2indirect
npmactions-up1.16.0indirect
npmajv6.15.0indirect
npmansi-colors4.1.3indirect
npmansi-regex5.0.1indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.7indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdeep-is0.1.4indirect
npmenquirer2.4.1indirect
npmescape-string-regexp4.0.0indirect
npmeslint10.7.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-prefer-let4.2.2indirect
npmeslint-scope9.1.2indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys3.4.3indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys5.0.1indirect
npmespree11.2.0indirect
npmesquery1.7.0indirect
npmesrecurse4.3.0indirect
npmestraverse5.3.0indirect
npmesutils2.0.3indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-json-stable-stringify2.1.0indirect
npmfast-levenshtein2.0.6indirect
npmfile-entry-cache8.0.0indirect
npmfind-up5.0.0indirect
npmflat-cache4.0.1indirect
npmflatted3.4.3indirect
npmglob-parent6.0.2indirect
npmignore5.3.2indirect
npmimurmurhash0.1.4indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmjson-buffer3.0.1indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse0.4.1indirect
npmjson-stable-stringify-without-jsonify1.0.1indirect
npmkeyv4.5.4indirect
npmlevn0.4.1indirect
npmlocate-path6.0.0indirect
npmminimatch10.2.5indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnanospinner1.2.2indirect
npmnatural-compare1.4.0indirect
npmoptionator0.9.4indirect
npmoxlint1.75.0indirect
npmoxlint-tsgolint7.0.2001indirect
npmp-limit3.1.0indirect
npmp-locate5.0.0indirect
npmpath-exists4.0.0indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmpicocolors1.1.1indirect
npmprelude-ls1.2.1indirect
npmpunycode2.3.1indirect
npmrequireindex1.2.0indirect
npmsemver7.8.5indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmstrip-ansi6.0.1indirect
npmtype-check0.4.0indirect
npmtypescript7.0.2indirect
npmundici-types8.3.0indirect
npmuri-js4.4.1indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmword-wrap1.2.5indirect
npmyaml2.9.0indirect
npmyocto-queue0.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 131 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
brace-expansion5.0.7indirecthigh25.0.9

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.