Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 19:14 UTC

gameroman-npm / config

TypeScriptMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗

gameroman-npm/config holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (78/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (25/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

54
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.

54
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

gameroman-npmOrganization
0 followers25 public repossince Aug 2025

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npm@gameroman/config0.3.05,6402040 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
11.8/36Commit cadence — 17/52 weeks with commits
14.3/18Commit volume — 38 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year38
human_commit_share0.605
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year17
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 6 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 40 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~12 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count6
latest_release_tagv0.3.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release40
mean_days_between_releases12
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?

25At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
50/80Monthly downloads — 5,640 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@gameroman/config
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,640
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?

53Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 79% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.793
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution — 50% of issues closed
24.6/30PR acceptance — 23/28 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 6/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs23
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs5
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
0/25Owner reach — 0 followers of gameroman-npm
12.6/25Track record — 25 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logingameroman-npm
public_repos25
account_age_days427

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 40 days ago
20/20Version history — 20 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@gameroman/config
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish40

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

35Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 22 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

25At Risk
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://npmx.dev/@gameroman/config
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://npmx.dev/@gameroman/config
docs_sitehttps://npmx.dev/@gameroman/config
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

75Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 22 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 6/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages6
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 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.

39Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
20.9/40Legible commit history — 9 of 23 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.391
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 38
8/8Automated maintenance — 9 of the last 38 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.237
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes944
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
2contributors
38commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
6releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.9 / 10
6.9aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 19:13 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
9CI-Tests22 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 6/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 6

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 6 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@biomejs/biome2.5.12indirect
npmoxfmt0.67.0indirect
npmoxlint1.82.0indirect
npmoxlint-tsgolint7.0.2001indirect
npmtsdown0.23.0indirect
npmtypescript7.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 6 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.

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 statistics — npm.