Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 11:25 UTC

fastify / fluent-json-schema

A fluent API to generate JSON schemas

JavaScriptMIT★ 526 stars⑂ 58 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

fastify/fluent-json-schema holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (56/100). It was last updated 34 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

90
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.

90
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 76 is calibrated to 90 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FastifyOrganization · verified domain
1,282 followers140 public repossince Jan 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmfluent-json-schema6.0.1152,7611734 days agojsonschemajsonschemajson-schemavalidationjson-schema-builderjson-schema-validation

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

62Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 34 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence15/52 weeks with commits
12.1/18Commit volume21 commits in the last year
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained8 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
commits_last_year21
human_commit_share0.67
days_since_last_push34
active_weeks_last_year15
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases37 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 34 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~213.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count37
latest_release_tagv6.0.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release34
mean_days_between_releases213.8
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?

80Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.1/60Stars526 stars
14.6/25Forks58 forks
6.5/15Watchers16 watchers
Inputs used
forks58
stars526
watchers16
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
69.1/80Monthly downloads152,761 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfluent-json-schema
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads152,761
unverified_packages_excluded
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 60% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth37 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled37
top_contributor_share0.603
How it's scored
38.6/42Issue resolution92% of issues closed
28.2/30PR acceptance216/230 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 15/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs216
open_issues6
closed_issues67
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.918
closed_unmerged_prs14
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
22.3/25Owner reach1,282 followers of fastify
25/25Track record140 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,282
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginfastify
public_repos140
account_age_days3,542

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 34 days ago
20/20Version history17 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfluent-json-schema
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish34

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configeslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests22 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://npmjs.com/package/fluent-json-schema
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics1 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfastify-library
has_wikino
homepagehttps://npmjs.com/package/fluent-json-schema
docs_sitehttps://npmjs.com/package/fluent-json-schema
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

86Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

82Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.8/2.5CI-Tests22 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 15/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
5.2/7.5Maintained8 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
3/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate8.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
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:fluent-json-schema@6.0.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1 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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history56 of 67 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.836
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configeslint.config.js
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance33 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.33
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/29 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes27,132
source_files_sampled29
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

526GitHub stars
37contributors
21commits, last 12 months
34days since last push
37releases
1bus factor
6open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 58 ⇿
0Stars
58Forks
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.

01020304050605522018-112022-092026-07
Major 5Minor 9Patch 22

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.2 / 10
8.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 11:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
7CI-Tests22 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 15/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
7Maintained8 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
6SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@fastify/deepmerge^3.0.0package.json
All dependencies 9

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@fastify/deepmerge^3.0.0direct
npmajv^8.12.0indirect
npmajv-formats^3.0.1indirect
npmc8^12.0.0indirect
npmeslint^9.17.0indirect
npmjsdoc-to-markdown^9.0.0indirect
npmlodash.merge^4.6.2indirect
npmneostandard^0.13.0indirect
npmtstyche^7.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:fluent-json-schema@6.0.1 pulls in 1 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 statisticsnpm.