Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 03:05 UTC

avoidwork / filesize.js

A lightweight, high-performance file size utility that converts bytes to human-readable strings. Zero dependencies. 100% test coverage.

JavaScriptBSD-3-Clause★ 1,708 stars⑂ 101 forkssince Mar 2012View on GitHub ↗

avoidwork/filesize.js holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (57/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

89
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.

89
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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Jason MulliganPersonal account
179 followers76 public repossince Aug 2010@adobe

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
npmfilesize11.0.2264,917,94414734 days agofilefilesizesizereadablefile-systembytesdiff

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 5 days ago
28.4/36Commit cadence41/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume150 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year150
human_commit_share0.3
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year41
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 34 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~32.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag11.0.22
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release34
mean_days_between_releases32.3
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?

82Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
52.4/60Stars1,708 stars
16.7/25Forks101 forks
6/15Watchers13 watchers
Inputs used
forks101
stars1,708
watchers13
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads64,917,944 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfilesize
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads64,917,944
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
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 92% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth28 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled28
top_contributor_share0.917
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
27.3/30PR acceptance214/235 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs214
open_issues0
closed_issues89
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs21
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
16.2/25Owner reach179 followers of avoidwork
25/25Track record76 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers179
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginavoidwork
public_repos76
account_age_days5,837
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 34 days ago
20/20Version history147 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfilesize
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish34

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://filesizejs.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics10 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfilesize, file, filesystem, size, size-calculation, jedec, iec, bits, bytes, simple
has_wikino
homepagehttps://filesizejs.com
docs_sitehttps://filesizejs.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

66Good · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 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
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 2 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
2/5Security-Policysecurity policy file 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_aggregate5.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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_packages97
unassessed_packages0
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 97 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
35.6/40Legible commit history20 of 30 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.667
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes12,845
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance70 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.7
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/15 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes43,104
source_files_sampled15
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,708GitHub stars
28contributors
150commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open 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 ★ / 101 ⇿
0Stars
101Forks
97Releases

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.

0204060801009022012-062019-062026-06
Major 8Minor 9Patch 80

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 03:05 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 5/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 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
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 97

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 97 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@jridgewell/gen-mapping0.3.12indirect
npm@jridgewell/resolve-uri3.1.2indirect
npm@jridgewell/source-map0.3.10indirect
npm@jridgewell/sourcemap-codec1.5.4indirect
npm@jridgewell/trace-mapping0.3.29indirect
npm@napi-rs/lzma-linux-x64-gnu1.5.1indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-android-arm-eabi0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-android-arm640.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-darwin-arm640.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-darwin-x640.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-freebsd-x640.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-arm-gnueabihf0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-arm-musleabihf0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-arm64-gnu0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-arm64-musl0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-ppc64-gnu0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-riscv64-gnu0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-riscv64-musl0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-s390x-gnu0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-x64-gnu0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-linux-x64-musl0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-openharmony-arm640.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-win32-arm64-msvc0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-win32-ia32-msvc0.62.0indirect
npm@oxfmt/binding-win32-x64-msvc0.62.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-android-arm-eabi1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-android-arm641.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-darwin-arm641.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-darwin-x641.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-freebsd-x641.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm-gnueabihf1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm-musleabihf1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm64-gnu1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-arm64-musl1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-ppc64-gnu1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-riscv64-gnu1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-riscv64-musl1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-s390x-gnu1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-x64-gnu1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-linux-x64-musl1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-openharmony-arm641.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-win32-arm64-msvc1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-win32-ia32-msvc1.77.0indirect
npm@oxlint/binding-win32-x64-msvc1.77.0indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-terser1.0.0indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-android-arm-eabi4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-android-arm644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-darwin-arm644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-darwin-x644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-freebsd-arm644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-freebsd-x644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm-gnueabihf4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm-musleabihf4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm64-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm64-musl4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-loong64-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-loong64-musl4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-ppc64-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-ppc64-musl4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-riscv64-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-riscv64-musl4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-s390x-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-x64-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-x64-musl4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-openbsd-x644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-openharmony-arm644.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-arm64-msvc4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-ia32-msvc4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-x64-gnu4.62.4indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-x64-msvc4.62.4indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.9indirect
npmacorn8.15.0indirect
npmauto-changelog2.6.0indirect
npmbuffer-from1.1.2indirect
npmcommander2.20.3indirect
npmcommander7.2.0indirect
npmfsevents2.3.3indirect
npmhandlebars4.7.9indirect
npmhusky9.1.7indirect
npmimport-cwd3.0.0indirect
npmimport-from3.0.0indirect
npmminimist1.2.8indirect
npmneo-async2.6.2indirect
npmoxfmt0.62.0indirect
npmoxlint1.77.0indirect
npmparse-github-url1.0.4indirect
npmresolve-from5.0.0indirect
npmrollup4.62.4indirect
npmsemver7.8.1indirect
npmserialize-javascript7.0.5indirect
npmsmob1.5.0indirect
npmsource-map0.6.1indirect
npmsource-map-support0.5.21indirect
npmterser5.43.1indirect
npmtinypool2.1.0indirect
npmuglify-js3.19.3indirect
npmwordwrap1.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 97 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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