Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-07 19:32 UTC

bytesbrains / weblocks

Block engine for AI-composable web apps — snap-together 'Lego' blocks + the AI catalog contract (manifest → validate → render static HTML).

TypeScriptMIT★ 1 star⑂ 1 forksince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗

bytesbrains/weblocks holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (41/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

65
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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

BytesBrainsPersonal account
1 follower23 public repossince Jun 2026BytesBrains Pte Ltd

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
npm@bytesbrains/weblocks0.12.02,2561512 days agoaillmweb-buildersite-generatorblockscomponentslegomanifeststatic-sitestructured-outputfunction-calling

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 3 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
17.1/18Commit volume79 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year79
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year3

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases16 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 12 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~1.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tagv0.12.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release12
mean_days_between_releases1.1
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
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars1
watchers0
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
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
44.7/80Monthly downloads2,256 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@bytesbrains/weblocks
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads2,256
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?

51Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 96% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.962
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
28.1/30PR acceptance60/64 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs60
open_issues0
closed_issues11
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d56
prs_decided_30d60
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
2.2/25Owner reach1 followers of bytesbrains
10.4/25Track record23 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers1
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginbytesbrains
public_repos23
account_age_days56
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 12 days ago
20/20Version history15 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@bytesbrains/weblocks
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish12

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests19 out of 19 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

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://bytesbrains.github.io/weblocks/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics12 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsai, blocks, function-calling, lego, llm, manifest, site-generator, static-site, structured-output, typescript, web-builder, zero-dependency
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://bytesbrains.github.io/weblocks/
docs_sitehttps://bytesbrains.github.io/weblocks/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 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-Tests19 out of 19 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
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
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
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.8
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
advisories5
affected_packages1
assessed_packages42
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 42 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.

73Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENT.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history79 of 79 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesAGENT.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes16,647
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice37 of the last 79 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.468
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
53.3/55Manageable file sizes4/132 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes80,138
source_files_sampled132
oversized_source_files4

Key facts

1GitHub stars
2contributors
79commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
16releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

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 · 2026-08-07 19:32 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests19 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
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
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 42 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@asamuzakjp/css-color5.1.11indirect
npm@asamuzakjp/dom-selector7.1.1indirect
npm@asamuzakjp/generational-cache1.0.1indirect
npm@asamuzakjp/nwsapi2.3.9indirect
npm@bramus/specificity2.4.2indirect
npm@csstools/color-helpers6.1.0indirect
npm@csstools/css-calc3.2.1indirect
npm@csstools/css-color-parser4.1.9indirect
npm@csstools/css-parser-algorithms4.0.0indirect
npm@csstools/css-syntax-patches-for-csstree1.1.6indirect
npm@csstools/css-tokenizer4.0.0indirect
npm@exodus/bytes1.15.1indirect
npm@types/node22.20.1indirect
npmbidi-js1.0.3indirect
npmcss-tree3.2.1indirect
npmdata-urls7.0.0indirect
npmdecimal.js10.6.0indirect
npmentities8.0.0indirect
npmhtml-encoding-sniffer6.0.0indirect
npmis-potential-custom-element-name1.0.1indirect
npmjsdom29.1.1indirect
npmlru-cache11.5.2indirect
npmmdn-data2.27.1indirect
npmparse58.0.1indirect
npmpunycode2.3.1indirect
npmrequire-from-string2.0.2indirect
npmsaxes6.0.0indirect
npmsource-map-js1.2.1indirect
npmsymbol-tree3.2.4indirect
npmtldts7.4.9indirect
npmtldts-core7.4.9indirect
npmtough-cookie6.0.2indirect
npmtr466.0.0indirect
npmtypescript5.9.3indirect
npmundici7.28.0indirect
npmundici-types6.21.0indirect
npmw3c-xmlserializer5.0.0indirect
npmwebidl-conversions8.0.1indirect
npmwhatwg-mimetype5.0.0indirect
npmwhatwg-url16.0.1indirect
npmxml-name-validator5.0.0indirect
npmxmlchars2.2.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 42 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
undici7.28.0indirecthigh58.9.0

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.

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.