Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 04:32 UTC

curiosity-ai / hnsw-sharp

C# library for approximate nearest neighbors search using Hierarchical Navigable Small World graphs

C#MIT★ 104 stars⑂ 12 forkssince Jul 2019View on GitHub ↗

#ann #approximate-nearest-neighbor-search #csharp #netcore #dotnet #embeddings #word2vec

curiosity-ai/hnsw-sharp holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (56/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (25/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

At Risk

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 39 is calibrated to 34 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

CuriosityOrganization · verified domain

89 followers80 public repossince Mar 2017

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
NuGet	HNSWpoints to another repo — not scored	26.9.5484	-	51	0 days ago	knn ann approximate nearest neighbor

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

35Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

58Moderate

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36	Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
15.7/18	Commit volume — 55 commits in the last year
1/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

commits_last_year	55
human_commit_share	0.88
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	8

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?

47Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

45Weak

How it's scored

32.7/60	Stars — 104 stars
8.7/25	Forks — 12 forks
3.9/15	Watchers — 6 watchers

Inputs used

forks	12
stars	104
watchers	6
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18	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	1
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	dev.azure.com
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

48Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

27At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.9/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
9.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 7 contributors
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	7
top_contributor_share	0.87

Issue & PR responsiveness

31At Risk

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
27.1/30	PR acceptance — 19/21 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	19
open_issues	9
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	1
prs_decided_7d	1
prs_merged_30d	1
prs_decided_30d	1
issue_closed_ratio	0
closed_unmerged_prs	2
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

89Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20	Verified domain
14.1/25	Owner reach — 89 followers of curiosity-ai
25/25	Track record — 80 public repos, account ~9 yr old

Inputs used

followers	89
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	yes
owner_login	curiosity-ai
public_repos	80
account_age_days	3,467

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

25At Risk · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

1Critical

How it's scored

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

Inputs used

has_ci	no
has_tests	no
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

60Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 7 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	ann, approximate-nearest-neighbor-search, csharp, netcore, dotnet, embeddings, word2vec
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

34At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

28At Risk

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5	CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no data
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
0.8/7.5	Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	13
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	5
scorecard_aggregate	2.8

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

60Moderate

How it's scored

12/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: MessagePack 3.1.0 (high 8.2)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
33.2/40	No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 99 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	12
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	6
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 1
direct_affected_packages	1

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

60Moderate

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
14.5/40	Legible commit history — 24 of 88 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.273
agent_instruction_files	AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	2,332

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

37Weak

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Src/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.Demo/HNSW.Net.Demo.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
0/10	Reproducible environment
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 13 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	no
lockfiles	—
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.13
toolchain_manifests	Src/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.Demo/HNSW.Net.Demo.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.HybridPareto/HNSW.Net.HybridPareto.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.TestFiltering/HNSW.Net.TestFiltering.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net.Tests/HNSW.Net.Tests.csproj, Src/HNSW.Net/HNSW.Net.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
54/55	Manageable file sizes — 1/55 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	C#
largest_source_bytes	213,082
source_files_sampled	55
oversized_source_files	1

Key facts

104GitHub stars

7contributors

55commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

0releases

1bus factor

9open issues

—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
nuget package 'HNSW' points at a different repository (https://github.com/curiosity-ai/hnsw.net); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 12 ⇿

0Stars

12Forks

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.

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.8 / 10

2.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 04:32 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0	CI-Tests	0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6	Contributors	project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/a	Dangerous-Workflow	no workflows found
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
1	Maintained	2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
n/a	Pinned-Dependencies	no dependencies found
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
n/a	Token-Permissions	No tokens found
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 9

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
NuGet	BenchmarkDotNet	`0.14.0`	Src/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark.csproj
NuGet	PureHDF	`1.0.1`	Src/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark/HNSW.Net.AnnBenchmark.csproj
NuGet	BenchmarkDotNet	`0.14.0`	Src/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark.csproj
NuGet	PureHDF	`1.0.1`	Src/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark/HNSW.Net.HybridBenchmark.csproj
NuGet	PureHDF	`1.0.1`	Src/HNSW.Net.HybridPareto/HNSW.Net.HybridPareto.csproj
NuGet	MSTest.TestAdapter	`4.0.2`	Src/HNSW.Net.Tests/HNSW.Net.Tests.csproj
NuGet	MSTest.TestFramework	`4.0.2`	Src/HNSW.Net.Tests/HNSW.Net.Tests.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.SDK	`18.0.1`	Src/HNSW.Net.Tests/HNSW.Net.Tests.csproj
NuGet	MessagePack	`3.1.0`	Src/HNSW.Net/HNSW.Net.csproj

All dependencies 6

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
NuGet	BenchmarkDotNet	`0.14.0`	direct
NuGet	MessagePack	`3.1.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`18.0.1`	direct
NuGet	MSTest.TestAdapter	`4.0.2`	direct
NuGet	MSTest.TestFramework	`4.0.2`	direct
NuGet	PureHDF	`1.0.1`	direct

Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 6 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
MessagePack	`3.1.0`	direct	high	12	`3.1.7`

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