Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 18:22 UTC

edspencer / herdctl

Runs Claude Code agents natively or in Docker, on schedules and connected to Discord & Slack

TypeScriptMIT★ 29 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Jan 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#ai#anthropic#claude#claudecode

edspencer/herdctl holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (87/100) and lowest on Security (32/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
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.

73
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Ed SpencerPersonal account
404 followers74 public repossince Apr 2008

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 publish
npmdocs0.4.03,9811341 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

72Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 327 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year327
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag@herdctl/discord@1.2.18
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases0.4
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

26At Risk
How it's scored
23.5/60Stars — 29 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars29
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

21At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 75% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.75

Issue & PR responsiveness

67Good
How it's scored
34.2/42Issue resolution — 81% of issues closed
23.8/30PR acceptance — 236/298 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs236
open_issues13
closed_issues57
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.814
closed_unmerged_prs62
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

67Good
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.7/25Owner reach — 404 followers of edspencer
25/25Track record — 74 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers404
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginedspencer
public_repos74
account_age_days6,670
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 41 days ago
20/20Version history — 13 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdocs
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish41

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

87Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

78Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — biome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 23 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://herdctl.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsai, anthropic, claude, claudecode
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://herdctl.dev
docs_sitehttps://herdctl.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

32At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

32At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 23 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 127 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

86Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, agents/engineer/CLAUDE.md, docs/CLAUDE.md, docs/src/content/docs/concepts/agents.md, packages/chat/CLAUDE.md, packages/cli/CLAUDE.md, packages/core/CLAUDE.md, packages/core/src/distribution/__tests__/fixtures/sample-agent/CLAUDE.md, packages/discord/CLAUDE.md, packages/slack/CLAUDE.md, packages/web/CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, agents/engineer/CLAUDE.md, docs/CLAUDE.md, docs/src/content/docs/concepts/agents.md, packages/chat/CLAUDE.md, packages/cli/CLAUDE.md, packages/core/CLAUDE.md, packages/core/src/distribution/__tests__/fixtures/sample-agent/CLAUDE.md, packages/discord/CLAUDE.md, packages/slack/CLAUDE.md, packages/web/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,076
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

66Good
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — biome.json
11/11Static type checking — docs/tsconfig.json, examples/library-usage/tsconfig.json, examples/recipes/tsconfig.json, packages/chat/tsconfig.json, packages/cli/tsconfig.json, packages/core/tsconfig.json, packages/discord/tsconfig.json, packages/slack/tsconfig.json, packages/web/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsdocs/tsconfig.json, examples/library-usage/tsconfig.json, examples/recipes/tsconfig.json, packages/chat/tsconfig.json, packages/cli/tsconfig.json, packages/core/tsconfig.json, packages/discord/tsconfig.json, packages/slack/tsconfig.json, packages/web/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
54.2/55Manageable file sizes — 7/471 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes223,947
source_files_sampled471
oversized_source_files7

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples, recipes
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, recipes
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

29GitHub stars
5contributors
327commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
13open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10
3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 18:22 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
7CI-Tests23 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
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
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities127 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@astrojs/sitemap^3.2.1docs/package.json
npm@astrojs/starlight^0.37.3docs/package.json
npm@astrojs/starlight-tailwind^4.0.2docs/package.json
npmastro^5.6.1docs/package.json
npmrehype-mermaid^3.0.0docs/package.json
npmsharp^0.34.2docs/package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with edspencer/herdctl. Read them side by side →

96vercel/aiThe AI Toolkit for TypeScript. From the creators of Next.js, the AI SDK is a free open-source library for building AI-powered applications and agents Exceptional96yamadashy/repomix📦 Repomix is a powerful tool that packs your entire repository into a single, AI-friendly file. Perfect for when you need to feed your codebase to Large Language Models (LLMs) or other AI tools like Claude, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Perplexity, Gemini, Gemma, Llama, Grok, and more.Exceptional95NousResearch/hermes-agentThe agent that grows with youExceptional94diegosouzapw/OmniRouteNever stop coding. Free MIT AI gateway: one endpoint, 290+ providers (90+ free), 500+ models — Kimi, Claude, GPT, OpenAI, Gemini, GLM, DeepSeek, MiniMax. Works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, Cline & Copilot. Quota-aware auto-fallback, RTK+Caveman compression saves 15-95% tokens, MCP/A2A, Desktop/PWA. Built by 500+ contributorsExceptional94griptape-ai/griptapeModular Python framework for AI agents and workflows with chain-of-thought reasoning, tools, and memory. Exceptional97strands-agents/harness-sdkBuild an agent harness and control it end-to-end. Open-source SDK for production AI agents in Python & TypeScript - any model, any cloud.Exceptional

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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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