Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 10:11 UTC

flowleap-ai / flowleap-cli

Rust · JavaScriptMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

flowleap-ai/flowleap-cli holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (32/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

59
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

59
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

flowleap-aiOrganization
0 followers2 public repossince Jul 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmflowleap0.4.02,4202210 days agopatentaicliflowleapepoops

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence7/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume123 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 24 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year123
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year7
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases22 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 10 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~1.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tagv0.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release10
mean_days_between_releases1.4

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

32At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
45.1/80Monthly downloads2,420 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesflowleap
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads2,420
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 92% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.921
How it's scored
38.5/42Issue resolution92% of issues closed
27.9/30PR acceptance26/28 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs26
open_issues2
closed_issues22
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d21
prs_decided_30d22
issue_closed_ratio0.917
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
0/25Owner reach0 followers of flowleap-ai
3.5/25Track record2 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginflowleap-ai
public_repos2
account_age_days11
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 10 days ago
20/20Version history22 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesflowleap
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish10

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

68Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent-tools, cli, epo, intellectual-property, mcp-server, patent, patent-ai, patent-search, uspto
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

35Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 24 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
1.5/7.5Vulnerabilities8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate3.5

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
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history95 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.95
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes12,887
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice60 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.6
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/55 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes42,318
source_files_sampled55
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
2contributors
123commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
22releases
1bus factor
2open issues
crates.io, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'flowleap-cli' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10
3.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 10:11 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
8CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 24 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
2Vulnerabilities8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioclap4Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.12Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1Cargo.toml
crates.iotoml0.8Cargo.toml
crates.iodirs6Cargo.toml
crates.iocolored3Cargo.toml
crates.iocomfy-table7Cargo.toml
crates.ioindicatif0.17Cargo.toml
crates.iodialoguer0.11Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.22Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror2Cargo.toml
crates.ioopen5Cargo.toml
crates.ioinclude_dir0.7Cargo.toml
crates.ioring0.17Cargo.toml
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.

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 v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsnpm.