Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 20:57 UTC

archcore-ai / cli

Git-native context engineering CLI and MCP server for AI coding agents. Keep specs, ADRs, rules, plans, and project knowledge in Git.

GoApache-2.0★ 64 stars⑂ 5 forkssince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindMCP serverCommand-line toolhow this is determined
#architecture#context-engineering#developer-tools#mcp#ai-agents#claude-code#cursor#mcp-server#adr#ai-coding#coding-agents#git-native#model-context-protocol#project-context#spec-driven-development#specifications#harness#harness-engineering

archcore-ai/cli holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (88/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (35/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
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.

67
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 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ArchcoreOrganization
20 followers8 public repossince Dec 2025

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

81Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
16.6/36Commit cadence — 24/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 134 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year134
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year24

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 44 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 5 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count44
latest_release_tagv0.8.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release5
mean_days_between_releases4

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

41Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

34At Risk
How it's scored
29.2/60Stars — 64 stars
5/25Forks — 5 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks5
stars64
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

35Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

13Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

50Moderate
How it's scored
23.2/42Issue resolution — 55% of issues closed
20/30PR acceptance — 2/3 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs2
open_issues13
closed_issues16
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.552
closed_unmerged_prs1
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.

Ownership & stewardship

48Weak
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
9.5/25Owner reach — 20 followers of archcore-ai
8.5/25Track record — 8 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers20
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginarchcore-ai
public_repos8
account_age_days275

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 2 out of 2 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://archcore.ai
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 18 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsarchitecture, context-engineering, developer-tools, mcp, ai-agents, claude-code, cursor, mcp-server, adr, ai-coding, coding-agents, git-native, model-context-protocol, project-context, spec-driven-development, specifications, harness, harness-engineering
has_wikino
homepagehttps://archcore.ai
docs_sitehttps://archcore.ai
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

42Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 2 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
2/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate4.2

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages2
assessed_packages40
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 2
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 40 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.

88Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, examples/01-minimal/AGENTS.md, examples/01-minimal/CLAUDE.md, examples/02-fullstack-app/AGENTS.md, examples/02-fullstack-app/CLAUDE.md, examples/03-product-planning/AGENTS.md, examples/03-product-planning/CLAUDE.md, examples/04-experience-playbook/AGENTS.md, examples/04-experience-playbook/CLAUDE.md, examples/05-global-single-source/AGENTS.md, examples/05-global-single-source/CLAUDE.md, examples/06-global-multiple-sources/AGENTS.md, examples/06-global-multiple-sources/CLAUDE.md, examples/07-local-overrides-global/AGENTS.md, examples/07-local-overrides-global/CLAUDE.md, examples/08-global-in-archcore/AGENTS.md, examples/08-global-in-archcore/CLAUDE.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/api/AGENTS.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/api/CLAUDE.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/web/AGENTS.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/web/CLAUDE.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/packages/shared-standards/AGENTS.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/packages/shared-standards/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/api/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/api/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/web/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/web/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/packages/ui/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/packages/ui/CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://archcore.ai/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://archcore.ai/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, examples/01-minimal/AGENTS.md, examples/01-minimal/CLAUDE.md, examples/02-fullstack-app/AGENTS.md, examples/02-fullstack-app/CLAUDE.md, examples/03-product-planning/AGENTS.md, examples/03-product-planning/CLAUDE.md, examples/04-experience-playbook/AGENTS.md, examples/04-experience-playbook/CLAUDE.md, examples/05-global-single-source/AGENTS.md, examples/05-global-single-source/CLAUDE.md, examples/06-global-multiple-sources/AGENTS.md, examples/06-global-multiple-sources/CLAUDE.md, examples/07-local-overrides-global/AGENTS.md, examples/07-local-overrides-global/CLAUDE.md, examples/08-global-in-archcore/AGENTS.md, examples/08-global-in-archcore/CLAUDE.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/api/AGENTS.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/api/CLAUDE.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/web/AGENTS.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/apps/web/CLAUDE.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/packages/shared-standards/AGENTS.md, examples/09-monorepo-shared-global/packages/shared-standards/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/api/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/api/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/web/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/apps/web/CLAUDE.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/packages/ui/AGENTS.md, examples/10-monorepo-root-global/packages/ui/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes14,159

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

71Good
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/287 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes58,732
source_files_sampled287
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

64GitHub stars
1contributors
134commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
44releases
1bus factor
13open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-21: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 64 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 57 ★ / 5 ⇿
57Stars
5Forks
42Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-21. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

010203040506057572026-032026-062026-08
Major 0Minor 7Patch 35
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10
4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 20:57 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests2 out of 2 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 1/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update 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
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/huhv1.0.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/lipglossv1.1.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/mark3labs/mcp-gov0.49.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/wk8/go-ordered-map/v2v2.1.8go.mod
All dependencies 40

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 34 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/huhv1.0.0direct
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/lipglossv1.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/mark3labs/mcp-gov0.49.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogithub.com/wk8/go-ordered-map/v2v2.1.8direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1direct
Gogithub.com/atotto/clipboardv0.1.4indirect
Gogithub.com/aymanbagabas/go-osc52/v2v2.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/bahlo/generic-list-gov0.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/buger/jsonparserv1.1.2indirect
Gogithub.com/catppuccin/gov0.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/bubblesv0.21.1-0.20250623103423-23b8fd6302d7indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/bubbleteav1.3.6indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/colorprofilev0.2.3-0.20250311203215-f60798e515dcindirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/ansiv0.9.3indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/cellbufv0.0.13indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/exp/stringsv0.0.0-20240722160745-212f7b056ed0indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/termv0.2.1indirect
Gogithub.com/dustin/go-humanizev1.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/erikgeiser/coninputv0.0.0-20211004153227-1c3628e74d0findirect
Gogithub.com/google/jsonschema-gov0.4.2indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/lucasb-eyer/go-colorfulv1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mailru/easyjsonv0.7.7indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isattyv0.0.20indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-localereaderv0.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-runewidthv0.0.16indirect
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/hashstructure/v2v2.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/muesli/ansiv0.0.0-20230316100256-276c6243b2f6indirect
Gogithub.com/muesli/cancelreaderv0.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/muesli/termenvv0.16.0indirect
Gogithub.com/rivo/unisegv0.4.7indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/castv1.7.1indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.9indirect
Gogithub.com/xo/terminfov0.0.0-20220910002029-abceb7e1c41eindirect
Gogithub.com/yosida95/uritemplate/v3v3.0.2indirect
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.15.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.33.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.24.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 40 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/sysv0.33.0indirectunknown10.44.0
golang.org/x/textv0.24.0indirectunknown10.39.0

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with archcore-ai/cli. Read them side by side →

94clay-good/OpenLoreDeterministic, local-first memory and guardrails for AI coding agents with no LLM in the hot path.Exceptional96sickn33/agentic-awesome-skillsAAS Core is the local, agent-first control plane for complete catalog discovery, agent-owned selection, stack validation, and planning, backed by 2,115+ agentic skills. Includes CLI, local MCP, catalog, plugins, and Workbench.Exceptional94smart-mcp-proxy/mcpproxy-goSupercharge AI Agents, SafelyExceptional99awslabs/cli-agent-orchestratorMulti-agent orchestration for AI coding CLIs — Claude Code, Kiro, Codex, and more, coordinated in isolated tmux sessionsExceptional97Observal/ObservalObserval is self-hosted registry for your coding agent extensions with a built in insight engine. Setup Observal, define the scope and share your Skills, MCPs and Agents with your peers.Exceptional96diegosouzapw/OmniRouteNever stop coding. Free MIT AI gateway: one endpoint, 352 providers (150+ free), 1200+ models Kimi, Claude, GPT, Gemini, GLM, DeepSeek, MiniMax. Works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, Cline & Copilot. Quota-aware auto-fallback, RTK+Caveman compression saves 15-95% tokens, MCP/A2A, Desktop/PWA. Built by 550+ contributorsExceptional

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.