Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 07:36 UTC

greenticai / greentic-llm

Provider-agnostic multi-LLM abstraction for the Greentic platform

RustMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

greenticai/greentic-llm holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (76/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (32/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Greentic.ai - The Digital Workers OSOrganization
5 followers87 public repossince Feb 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iogreentic-llm1.1.02,491153 days agoaigreenticllmrigapi-bindings

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

64Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
15.5/18Commit volume — 52 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year52
human_commit_share0.942
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year4

Release discipline

88Excellent
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 11 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~9.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count11
latest_release_tagv1.3.1-research.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases9.4
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?

32At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
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_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

57Moderate
How it's scored
45.3/80Monthly downloads — 2,491 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgreentic-llm
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads7,523
monthly_downloads2,491
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

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

25At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 86% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.857

Issue & PR responsiveness

54Moderate
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
24.4/30PR acceptance — 26/32 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs26
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs6
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
5.6/25Owner reach — 5 followers of greenticai
14.1/25Track record — 87 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers5
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logingreenticai
public_repos87
account_age_days200

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history — 15 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgreentic-llm
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 11 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 18 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/greentic-llm
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/greentic-llm
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

56Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 18 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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 — 30 commit(s) and 0 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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

66Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 48 of 49 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.98
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

72Good
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 3 of the last 52 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.058
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/8 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes51,567
source_files_sampled8
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
2contributors
52commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
11releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-05 07:35 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
10CI-Tests18 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioanyhow1Cargo.toml
crates.ioasync-trait0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iochrono0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4.5Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-util0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iorig-core0.38Cargo.toml
crates.iorig-bedrock0.38Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror2Cargo.toml
crates.iozeroize1.8Cargo.toml
All dependencies 13

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanyhow—direct
crates.ioasync-trait—direct
crates.iochrono—direct
crates.ioclap—direct
crates.iofutures-util—direct
crates.iorig-bedrock—direct
crates.iorig-core—direct
crates.ioserde—direct
crates.ioserde_json—direct
crates.iothiserror—direct
crates.iozeroize—direct
crates.iohttp—indirect
crates.iotokio—indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 greenticai/greentic-llm. Read them side by side →

98github/copilot-sdkMulti-platform SDK for integrating GitHub Copilot Agent into apps and servicesExceptional95zeroclaw-labs/zeroclawFast, small, and fully autonomous AI personal assistant infrastructure, any OS, any platform — deploy anywhere, swap anything 🦀Exceptional94MemoriLabs/MemoriMemori is agent-native memory infrastructure. A LLM-agnostic layer that turns agent execution and conversation into structured, persistent state for production systems. Built for enterprise, Memori works with the data infrastructure you already run, no rip-and-replace, and deploys across managed cloud, single-tenant cloud, VPC, and on-premises.Exceptional100deepset-ai/haystackOpen-source AI orchestration framework for building context-engineered, production-ready LLM applications. Design modular pipelines and agent workflows with explicit control over retrieval, routing, memory, and generation. Built for scalable agents, RAG, multimodal applications, semantic search, and conversational systems.Exceptional99langchain-ai/langgraphBuild resilient agents.Exceptional99google/adk-pythonAn open-source, code-first Python toolkit for building, evaluating, and deploying sophisticated AI agents with flexibility and control.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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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