Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-23 22:32 UTC

brenpike / Chatter.Rest.Hal

A .NET/C# implementation of HAL (Hypertext Application Language) for building and consuming RESTful APIs.

C#MIT★ 5 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2022View on GitHub ↗

#csharp #dotnet #hal #hal-json #hateoas #hypermedia #json #rest #rest-api #source-generator #system-text-json #uri-template

brenpike/Chatter.Rest.Hal holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (77/100) and lowest on Vitality (41/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Moderate

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.

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)

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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Brennan PikePersonal account

2 followers5 public repossince Nov 2013

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
NuGet	Chatter.Rest.Hal	2.0.0	-	15	0 days ago	chatter rest hal hal+json hateoas
NuGet	Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators	0.4.0	-	7	0 days ago	chatter rest hal hal+json hateoas

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

41Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

67Good

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
2.8/36	Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 122 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 4 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	122
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	4

Release discipline

1Critical

How it's scored

0/27	Ships releases — no releases published
0/36	Release recency — no releases
0/27	Release cadence — no releases
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count

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?

45Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

12Critical

How it's scored

9.8/60	Stars — 5 stars
0/25	Forks — 1 forks
1.7/15	Watchers — 3 watchers

Inputs used

forks	1
stars	5
watchers	3
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

70Good

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	4
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

61Moderate

How it's scored

49.1/80	Total downloads — 53,501 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	Chatter.Rest.Hal, Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators
dependents	—
ecosystems	nuget
total_downloads	53,501
monthly_downloads	—
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

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

15Critical

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 97% of commits
5.4/13.5	Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	4
top_contributor_share	0.969

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good

How it's scored

40.6/42	Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
28.1/30	PR acceptance — 87/93 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	87
open_issues	1
closed_issues	28
prs_merged_7d	9
prs_decided_7d	9
prs_merged_30d	9
prs_decided_30d	9
issue_closed_ratio	0.966
closed_unmerged_prs	6
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

39Weak

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
3.4/25	Owner reach — 2 followers of brenpike
17.7/25	Track record — 5 public repos, account ~12 yr old

Inputs used

followers	2
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	brenpike
public_repos	5
account_age_days	4,675

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on nuget
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20	Version history — 15 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	Chatter.Rest.Hal, Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators
ecosystems	nuget
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

72Good

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4	.editorconfig
18/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	yes
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

85Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 12 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	csharp, dotnet, hal, hal-json, hateoas, hypermedia, json, rest, rest-api, source-generator, system-text-json, uri-template
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

64Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

55Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 11 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 4 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
3/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
4.5/5	SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	5.5

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	13
unassessed_packages	1
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 13 resolved dependencies against OSV. 1 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.

73Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

81Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
35.7/40	Legible commit history — 67 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.67
agent_instruction_files	AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	5,929

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

72Good

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — src/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators.csproj, src/Chatter.Rest.Hal.Core/Chatter.Rest.Hal.Core.csproj, src/Chatter.Rest.Hal/Chatter.Rest.Hal.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 65 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	packages.lock.json
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	yes
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.65
toolchain_manifests	src/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators.csproj, src/Chatter.Rest.Hal.Core/Chatter.Rest.Hal.Core.csproj, src/Chatter.Rest.Hal/Chatter.Rest.Hal.csproj, test/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators.Tests/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators.Tests.csproj, test/Chatter.Rest.Hal.Tests/Chatter.Rest.Hal.Tests.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/130 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	C#
largest_source_bytes	16,466
source_files_sampled	130
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

33At Risk

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20	MCP server
0/40	Runnable examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	—
has_mcp_signal	yes
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

5GitHub stars

4contributors

122commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

0releases

1bus factor

1open issues

—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10

5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-23 22:31 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
5	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
9	CI-Tests	11 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0	Contributors	project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	4 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
6	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
9	SAST	SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 4

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp	`4.3.1`	src/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators.csproj
NuGet	Chatter.Rest.Hal	`1.1.0`	src/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators/Chatter.Rest.Hal.CodeGenerators.csproj
NuGet	System.Text.Json	`6.*`	src/Chatter.Rest.Hal/Chatter.Rest.Hal.csproj
NuGet	Chatter.Rest.UriTemplates	`0.1.0`	src/Chatter.Rest.Hal/Chatter.Rest.Hal.csproj

All dependencies 14

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 9 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
NuGet	Chatter.Rest.Hal	`1.1.0`	direct
NuGet	Chatter.Rest.UriTemplates	`0.1.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp	`4.3.1`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp	`4.8.0`	direct
NuGet	System.Text.Json	`—`	direct
NuGet	coverlet.collector	`3.1.2`	indirect
NuGet	coverlet.msbuild	`3.1.0`	indirect
NuGet	FluentAssertions	`6.2.0`	indirect
NuGet	FluentAssertions	`6.6.0`	indirect
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`17.0.0`	indirect
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`17.1.0`	indirect
NuGet	Moq	`4.16.1`	indirect
NuGet	xunit	`2.4.1`	indirect
NuGet	xunit.runner.visualstudio	`2.4.3`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 13 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 1 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.

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 — NuGet.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records