Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 17:47 UTC

docsy / docsy-example

An example documentation site using the Docsy Hugo theme

JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 558 stars⑂ 753 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

KindNetwork servicehow this is determined

#docsy #hugo #hugo-theme #documentation-site #documentation-website #docker #docsy-example #hugo-theme-demo

docsy/docsy-example holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (54/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

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.

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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

DocsyOrganization

1 follower3 public repossince Aug 2026

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
Go	github.com/google/docsy-examplepoints to another repo — not scored	v0.17.0	-	18	19 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

77Good

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
14.5/36	Commit cadence — 21/52 weeks with commits
16.3/18	Commit volume — 64 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	64
human_commit_share	0.7
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	21

Release discipline

92Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 18 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 19 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~94.5 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	18
latest_release_tag	v0.17.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	19
mean_days_between_releases	94.5

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?

73Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

76Good

How it's scored

44.5/60	Stars — 558 stars
24/25	Forks — 753 forks
7/15	Watchers — 19 watchers

Inputs used

forks	753
stars	558
watchers	19
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 (Apache-2.0)
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	0
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

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)

57Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 47% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 33 contributors
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	33
top_contributor_share	0.466

Issue & PR responsiveness

66Good

How it's scored

39.2/42	Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
20.1/30	PR acceptance — 246/368 decided PRs merged
5.2/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/5 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

merged_prs	246
open_issues	8
closed_issues	111
prs_merged_7d	2
prs_decided_7d	4
prs_merged_30d	16
prs_decided_30d	21
issue_closed_ratio	0.933
closed_unmerged_prs	122
first_time_authors_30d	3
first_time_prs_merged_30d	2
first_time_prs_decided_30d	5

Ownership & stewardship

37Weak

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
2.2/25	Owner reach — 1 followers of docsy
4.5/25	Track record — 3 public repos, account ~0 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	docsy
public_repos	3
account_age_days	18

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — package.json ("prettier")
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

75Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://example.docsy.dev
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 8 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	docsy, hugo, hugo-theme, documentation-site, documentation-website, docker, docsy-example, hugo-theme-demo
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://example.docsy.dev
docs_site	https://example.docsy.dev
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?

73Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

66Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0.8/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 3/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
1.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	6.5

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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	135
unassessed_packages	0
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 135 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://www.docsy.dev/llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 63 of 70 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	https://www.docsy.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share	0.9
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

74Good

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — package.json ("prettier")
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 30 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	go.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.3

Code legibility for models

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/4 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	JavaScript
largest_source_bytes	2,254
source_files_sampled	4
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

40Weak

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20	MCP server
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	network-service

Key facts

558GitHub stars

33contributors

64commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

18releases

2bus factor

8open issues

Go, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
go package 'github.com/google/docsy-example' points at a different repository (https://github.com/google/docsy-example); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 753 ⇿

0Stars

753Forks

18Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 11Patch 7

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10

6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 17:46 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
1	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1	Code-Review	Found 3/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
6	Contributors	project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
10	Pinned-Dependencies	all dependencies are pinned
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
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 2

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
npm	@fortawesome/fontawesome-free	`7.3.1`	packages/hugoautogen/package.json
npm	bootstrap	`5.3.8`	packages/hugoautogen/package.json

All dependencies 135

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 133 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@fortawesome/fontawesome-free	`7.3.1`	direct
npm	bootstrap	`5.3.8`	direct
Go	github.com/google/docsy/theme	`v0.17.1-0.20260831231032-2c44726e7773`	indirect
npm	@bufbuild/protobuf	`2.14.0`	indirect
npm	@docsy/hugoautogen	`0.1.0`	indirect
npm	@epic-web/invariant	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	@isaacs/fs-minipass	`4.0.1`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-android-arm64	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-darwin-arm64	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-darwin-x64	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-freebsd-x64	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-linux-arm-glibc	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-linux-arm-musl	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-linux-arm64-glibc	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-linux-arm64-musl	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-linux-x64-glibc	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-linux-x64-musl	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-win32-arm64	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@parcel/watcher-win32-x64	`2.6.0`	indirect
npm	@popperjs/core	`2.11.8`	indirect
npm	adm-zip	`0.6.1`	indirect
npm	ansi-regex	`5.0.1`	indirect
npm	ansi-styles	`4.3.0`	indirect
npm	anymatch	`3.1.3`	indirect
npm	autoprefixer	`10.5.4`	indirect
npm	baseline-browser-mapping	`2.11.15`	indirect
npm	binary-extensions	`2.3.0`	indirect
npm	braces	`3.0.3`	indirect
npm	browserslist	`4.28.8`	indirect
npm	caniuse-lite	`1.0.30001809`	indirect
npm	chokidar	`3.6.0`	indirect
npm	chokidar	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	chownr	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	cliui	`8.0.1`	indirect
npm	color-convert	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	color-name	`1.1.4`	indirect
npm	colorjs.io	`0.7.1`	indirect
npm	cross-env	`10.1.0`	indirect
npm	cross-spawn	`7.0.6`	indirect
npm	dependency-graph	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	detect-libc	`2.1.2`	indirect
npm	electron-to-chromium	`1.5.409`	indirect
npm	emoji-regex	`8.0.0`	indirect
npm	escalade	`3.2.0`	indirect
npm	fdir	`6.5.0`	indirect
npm	fill-range	`7.1.1`	indirect
npm	fraction.js	`5.3.4`	indirect
npm	fs-extra	`11.4.0`	indirect
npm	fsevents	`2.3.3`	indirect
npm	get-caller-file	`2.0.5`	indirect
npm	glob-parent	`5.1.2`	indirect
npm	graceful-fs	`4.2.11`	indirect
npm	has-flag	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	hugo-extended	`0.164.0`	indirect
npm	immutable	`5.1.9`	indirect
npm	is-binary-path	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	is-extglob	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	is-fullwidth-code-point	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	is-glob	`4.0.3`	indirect
npm	is-number	`7.0.0`	indirect
npm	isexe	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	jsonfile	`6.2.1`	indirect
npm	lilconfig	`3.1.3`	indirect
npm	link-cache	`0.3.0`	indirect
npm	minipass	`7.1.3`	indirect
npm	minizlib	`3.1.0`	indirect
npm	nanoid	`3.3.18`	indirect
npm	node-addon-api	`7.1.1`	indirect
npm	node-releases	`2.0.53`	indirect
npm	normalize-path	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	npm-check-updates	`23.1.0`	indirect
npm	path-key	`3.1.1`	indirect
npm	picocolors	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	picomatch	`2.3.2`	indirect
npm	picomatch	`4.0.5`	indirect
npm	pify	`2.3.0`	indirect
npm	postcss	`8.5.26`	indirect
npm	postcss-cli	`11.0.1`	indirect
npm	postcss-load-config	`5.1.0`	indirect
npm	postcss-reporter	`7.1.0`	indirect
npm	postcss-value-parser	`4.2.0`	indirect
npm	prettier	`3.9.6`	indirect
npm	pretty-hrtime	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	read-cache	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	readdirp	`3.6.0`	indirect
npm	readdirp	`5.1.1`	indirect
npm	require-directory	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	rtlcss	`4.3.0`	indirect
npm	rxjs	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	sass	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-all-unknown	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-android-arm	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-android-arm64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-android-riscv64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-android-x64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-darwin-arm64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-darwin-x64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-arm	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-arm64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-musl-arm	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-musl-arm64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-musl-riscv64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-musl-x64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-riscv64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-linux-x64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-unknown-all	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-win32-arm64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	sass-embedded-win32-x64	`1.103.1`	indirect
npm	shebang-command	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	shebang-regex	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	slash	`5.1.0`	indirect
npm	source-map-js	`1.2.1`	indirect
npm	string-width	`4.2.3`	indirect
npm	strip-ansi	`6.0.1`	indirect
npm	strip-json-comments	`3.1.1`	indirect
npm	supports-color	`8.1.1`	indirect
npm	sync-child-process	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	sync-message-port	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	tar	`7.5.22`	indirect
npm	thenby	`1.4.1`	indirect
npm	tinyglobby	`0.2.17`	indirect
npm	to-regex-range	`5.0.1`	indirect
npm	tslib	`2.8.1`	indirect
npm	universalify	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	update-browserslist-db	`1.3.1`	indirect
npm	varint	`6.0.0`	indirect
npm	which	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	wrap-ansi	`7.0.0`	indirect
npm	y18n	`5.0.8`	indirect
npm	yallist	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	yaml	`2.9.0`	indirect
npm	yargs	`17.7.3`	indirect
npm	yargs-parser	`21.1.1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 135 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.

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 — Go.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records