Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 17:54 UTC

clerk-community / elysia-clerk

Unofficial Clerk plugin for Elysia.js.

TypeScriptMIT★ 106 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Aug 2023View on GitHub ↗

clerk-community/elysia-clerk holds a health index of 51 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (66/100) and lowest on Security (40/100). It was last updated 40 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

51
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.

51
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 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Clerk CommunityOrganization
2 followers4 public repossince Jun 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmelysia-clerkpoints to another repo — not scored1.0.23,4515155 days agoauthauthenticationbunclerkjwtpasswordlesssessiontypescript

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

66Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 40 days ago
9/36Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
17/18Commit volume — 77 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year77
human_commit_share0.76
days_since_last_push40
active_weeks_last_year13
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 37 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 55 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~45.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count37
latest_release_tagv1.0.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release55
mean_days_between_releases45.6

Community & Adoption

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

44Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
32.8/60Stars — 106 stars
6.5/25Forks — 7 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars106
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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

Sustainability & Governance

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

43Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.997
How it's scored
31.5/42Issue resolution — 75% of issues closed
23.9/30PR acceptance — 94/118 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs94
open_issues4
closed_issues12
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.75
closed_unmerged_prs24
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
3.4/25Owner reach — 2 followers of clerk-community
11.6/25Track record — 4 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginclerk-community
public_repos4
account_age_days1,195

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsauth, bun
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?

40Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestspackage.json
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages10
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:elysia-clerk@1.0.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 10 packages. 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.

59Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://clerk.com/llms-full.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 68 of 76 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://clerk.com/llms-full.txt
legible_history_share0.895
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 checking — tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 16 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.16
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/13 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes6,983
source_files_sampled13
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

106GitHub stars
2contributors
77commits, last 12 months
40days since last push
37releases
1bus factor
4open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • npm package 'elysia-clerk' points at a different repository (https://github.com/wobsoriano/elysia-clerk); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code 0; Skipping github.com/clerk-community/elysia-clerk: run: RepoClient.LocalPath: error during tarballHandler.setup: internal error: handler.httpClient.Do: Get "https://codeload.github.com/clerk-community/elysia-clerk/legacy.tar.gz/refs/heads/main": internal error: innerTransport.RoundTrip: internal error: innerTransport.RoundTrip: error in HTTP: dial tcp: lookup codeload.github.com on 127.0.0.11:53: server misbehaving); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks
36Releases

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.

1234567712024-032025-052026-07
Major 1Minor 7Patch 28

Each point covers 3 days.

Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@clerk/backend^3.13.0package.json
npm@clerk/shared^4.25.7package.json
All dependencies 9

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@clerk/backend^3.13.0direct
npm@clerk/shared^4.25.7direct
npm@arethetypeswrong/cli^0.18.2indirect
npm@changesets/cli^2.27.10indirect
npm@elysiajs/eden^1.4.8indirect
npm@elysiajs/html^1.4.0indirect
npmelysia^1.4.28indirect
npmtypescript6.0.2indirect
npmvite-plus^0.1.14indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:elysia-clerk@1.0.2 pulls in 10 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm.