Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 00:58 UTC

ethereum-optimism / monitorism

Suite of tools for Monitoring OP Stack Chains 🔴 Offers real-time detection and Incident response capabilities ✨

GoMIT★ 38 stars⑂ 34 forkssince Apr 2024View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

#monitoring #onchain #optimism #security

ethereum-optimism/monitorism holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (84/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (66/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Exceptional

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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OptimismOrganization · verified domain

3,087 followers143 public repossince Dec 2019

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/ethereum-optimism/monitorism/op-monitorism	v0.0.12	-	12	56 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

73Good

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 1 days ago
12.5/36	Commit cadence — 18/52 weeks with commits
14.4/18	Commit volume — 39 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	39
human_commit_share	0.82
days_since_last_push	1
active_weeks_last_year	18

Release discipline

92Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 9 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 56 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~94.7 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	9
latest_release_tag	op-monitorism/v0.0.12
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	56
mean_days_between_releases	94.7

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?

66Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

44Weak

How it's scored

25.4/60	Stars — 38 stars
12.7/25	Forks — 34 forks
6.2/15	Watchers — 14 watchers

Inputs used

forks	34
stars	38
watchers	14
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

92Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	yes

Sustainability & Governance

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

84Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

63Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 38% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 18 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	18
top_contributor_share	0.376

Issue & PR responsiveness

81Excellent

How it's scored

33.6/42	Issue resolution — 80% of issues closed
22.5/30	PR acceptance — 140/187 decided PRs merged
13/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
12/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8

Inputs used

merged_prs	140
open_issues	4
closed_issues	16
prs_merged_7d	1
prs_decided_7d	1
prs_merged_30d	4
prs_decided_30d	6
issue_closed_ratio	0.8
closed_unmerged_prs	47
first_time_authors_30d	1
first_time_prs_merged_30d	1
first_time_prs_decided_30d	1

Ownership & stewardship

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20	Verified domain
25/25	Owner reach — 3,087 followers of ethereum-optimism
25/25	Track record — 143 public repos, account ~6 yr old

Inputs used

followers	3,087
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	yes
owner_login	ethereum-optimism
public_repos	143
account_age_days	2,470

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 56 days ago
20/20	Version history — 12 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/ethereum-optimism/monitorism/op-monitorism
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	56

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 — 5 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .golangci.yml
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://www.optimism.io/
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 4 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	monitoring, onchain, optimism, security
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://www.optimism.io/
docs_site	https://www.optimism.io/
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?

83Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

79Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3/7.5	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
6/7.5	Code-Review — Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
4/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
5/5	SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
5.2/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	7.9

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	7
affected_packages	4
assessed_packages	70
unassessed_packages	7
affected_by_severity	moderate 3, unknown 1
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 70 resolved dependencies against OSV. 7 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

81Excellent · 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://docs.optimism.io/llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 81 of 82 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	https://docs.optimism.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share	0.988
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

90Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile, op-monitorism/Makefile, op-monitorism/faultproof_withdrawals/runbooks/automated/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
8/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	go.sum
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	Makefile, op-monitorism/Makefile, op-monitorism/faultproof_withdrawals/runbooks/automated/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.05
toolchain_manifests	op-monitorism/go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

89Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
43.9/55	Manageable file sizes — 15/74 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	138,936
source_files_sampled	74
oversized_source_files	15

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — notebooks

Inputs used

example_dirs	notebooks
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

38GitHub stars

18contributors

39commits, last 12 months

1days since last push

9releases

2bus factor

4open issues

Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 34 ⇿

0Stars

34Forks

7Releases

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 0Patch 0

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.9 / 10

7.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-16 00:57 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
4	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
8	Code-Review	Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10	Contributors	project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
8	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
10	SAST	SAST tool is run on all commits
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
7	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6	Vulnerabilities	4 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 11

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism	`v1.12.2`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/op-bindings	`v0.10.14`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum	`v1.17.0`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/hashicorp/golang-lru	`v0.5.4`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/joho/godotenv	`v1.5.1`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.21.1`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.6.2`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.11.1`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	github.com/urfave/cli/v2	`v2.27.7`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/exp	`v0.0.0-20260718201538-764159d718ef`	op-monitorism/go.mod
Go	gopkg.in/yaml.v3	`v3.0.1`	op-monitorism/go.mod

All dependencies 77

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 67 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism	`v1.12.2`	direct
Go	github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/op-bindings	`v0.10.14`	direct
Go	github.com/hashicorp/golang-lru	`v0.5.4`	direct
Go	github.com/joho/godotenv	`v1.5.1`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.21.1`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.6.2`	direct
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.11.1`	direct
Go	github.com/urfave/cli/v2	`v2.27.7`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/exp	`v0.0.0-20260718201538-764159d718ef`	direct
Go	gopkg.in/yaml.v3	`v3.0.1`	direct
Go	github.com/beorn7/perks	`v1.0.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/bits-and-blooms/bitset	`v1.20.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/burntsushi/toml	`v1.5.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2	`v2.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/clipperhouse/uax29/v2	`v2.2.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/consensys/gnark-crypto	`v0.18.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/cpuguy83/go-md2man/v2	`v2.0.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/crate-crypto/go-ipa	`v0.0.0-20240724233137-53bbb0ceb27a`	indirect
Go	github.com/crate-crypto/go-kzg-4844	`v1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/davecgh/go-spew	`v1.1.2-0.20180830191138-d8f796af33cc`	indirect
Go	github.com/deckarep/golang-set/v2	`v2.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/decred/dcrd/dcrec/secp256k1/v4	`v4.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/ethereum/c-kzg-4844	`v1.0.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/ethereum/go-verkle	`v0.2.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.8.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-ole/go-ole	`v1.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/gofrs/flock	`v0.8.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/golang/snappy	`v0.0.5-0.20220116011046-fa5810519dcb`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/gorilla/websocket	`v1.5.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/holiman/bloomfilter/v2	`v2.0.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/holiman/uint256	`v1.3.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/huin/goupnp	`v1.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/jackpal/go-nat-pmp	`v1.0.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/klauspost/compress	`v1.18.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/kylelemons/godebug	`v1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/mattn/go-runewidth	`v0.0.24`	indirect
Go	github.com/microsoft/go-winio	`v0.6.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/munnerz/goautoneg	`v0.0.0-20191010083416-a7dc8b61c822`	indirect
Go	github.com/naoina/go-stringutil	`v0.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/naoina/toml	`v0.1.2-0.20170918210437-9fafd6967416`	indirect
Go	github.com/nxadm/tail	`v1.4.11`	indirect
Go	github.com/olekukonko/tablewriter	`v0.0.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/pion/dtls/v2	`v2.2.12`	indirect
Go	github.com/pion/dtls/v3	`v3.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/pion/logging	`v0.2.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/pion/stun/v2	`v2.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/pion/transport/v2	`v2.2.10`	indirect
Go	github.com/pion/transport/v3	`v3.0.8`	indirect
Go	github.com/pmezard/go-difflib	`v1.0.1-0.20181226105442-5d4384ee4fb2`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/common	`v0.62.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/procfs	`v0.15.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/russross/blackfriday/v2	`v2.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/shirou/gopsutil	`v3.21.11+incompatible`	indirect
Go	github.com/stretchr/objx	`v0.5.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/supranational/blst	`v0.3.16`	indirect
Go	github.com/syndtr/goleveldb	`v1.0.1-0.20220614013038-64ee5596c38a`	indirect
Go	github.com/tklauser/go-sysconf	`v0.3.16`	indirect
Go	github.com/tklauser/numcpus	`v0.11.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/victoriametrics/fastcache	`v1.12.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/wlynxg/anet	`v0.0.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/xrash/smetrics	`v0.0.0-20250705151800-55b8f293f342`	indirect
Go	github.com/yusufpapurcu/wmi	`v1.2.4`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.56.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`v0.57.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/sync	`v0.22.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.47.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/term	`v0.45.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.10.0`	indirect
Go	google.golang.org/protobuf	`v1.36.11`	indirect
PyPI	ipywidgets	`—`	indirect
PyPI	jupyterlab	`—`	indirect
PyPI	python-dotenv	`—`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`—`	indirect
PyPI	toml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`—`	indirect
PyPI	web3	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 4

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 70 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 4 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 7 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
github.com/pion/dtls/v2	`v2.2.12`	indirect	moderate	2	`3.1.1`
github.com/pion/dtls/v3	`v3.0.0`	indirect	moderate	3	`3.1.4`
github.com/pion/stun/v2	`v2.0.0`	indirect	moderate	1	`3.1.5`
golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.56.0`	indirect	unknown	1	—

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