Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 17:09 UTC

hannsxpeter / godpowers

Ship fast. Ship right. Ship everything. Ship accountably. AI-powered dev system: slash commands orchestrate specialist agents from idea to hardened production. Imports godplans plans and godaudits reports; artifacts as .mdx.

JavaScriptMIT★ 6 stars⑂ 1 forksince May 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

hannsxpeter/godpowers holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (50/100). It was last updated 12 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
overall / 100
Good

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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Hanns PeterPersonal account
13 followers28 public repossince Sep 2015Sharetact Inc.

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 12 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence — 18/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 453 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_year453
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push12
active_weeks_last_year18

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 62 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv6.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release62
mean_days_between_releases1.7
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?

50Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
11.3/60Stars — 6 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars6
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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
41.5/80Monthly downloads — 1,304 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgodpowers
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads1,304
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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.993
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
24.7/30PR acceptance — 84/102 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs84
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs18
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
8.2/25Owner reach — 13 followers of hannsxpeter
22.6/25Track record — 28 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginhannsxpeter
public_repos28
account_age_days4,046
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 62 days ago
20/20Version history — 99 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgodpowers
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish62

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

72Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 6 out of 7 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

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 15 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent-orchestration, ai-coding, claude-code, codex, cursor, developer-tools, meta-prompting, skill-system, slash-commands, spec-driven-development, tdd, workflow-automation, godplans, mdx, godaudits
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

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
2/2.5CI-Tests — 6 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
advisories3
affected_packages1
assessed_packages55
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1
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 55 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.

67Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 97 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes969
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 47 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 3 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.47
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.03
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/39 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes26,078
source_files_sampled39
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

6GitHub stars
2contributors
453commits, last 12 months
12days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

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 · 2026-10-20 17:09 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
8CI-Tests6 out of 7 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 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 55

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 55 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@bcoe/v8-coverage1.0.2indirect
npm@godpowers/mcp6.4.0indirect
npm@istanbuljs/schema0.1.6indirect
npm@jridgewell/resolve-uri3.1.2indirect
npm@jridgewell/sourcemap-codec1.5.5indirect
npm@jridgewell/trace-mapping0.3.31indirect
npm@types/istanbul-lib-coverage2.0.6indirect
npmansi-regex6.2.2indirect
npmansi-styles6.2.3indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.9indirect
npmc812.0.0indirect
npmcliui9.0.1indirect
npmconvert-source-map2.0.0indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmemoji-regex10.6.0indirect
npmescalade3.2.0indirect
npmfind-up5.0.0indirect
npmforeground-child3.3.1indirect
npmget-caller-file2.0.5indirect
npmget-east-asian-width1.6.0indirect
npmglob13.0.6indirect
npmhas-flag4.0.0indirect
npmhtml-escaper2.0.2indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmistanbul-lib-coverage3.2.2indirect
npmistanbul-lib-report3.0.1indirect
npmistanbul-reports3.2.0indirect
npmlocate-path6.0.0indirect
npmlru-cache11.5.2indirect
npmmake-dir4.0.0indirect
npmminimatch10.2.5indirect
npmminipass7.1.3indirect
npmp-limit3.1.0indirect
npmp-locate5.0.0indirect
npmpath-exists4.0.0indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmpath-scurry2.0.2indirect
npmsemver7.8.5indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmsignal-exit4.1.0indirect
npmstring-width7.2.0indirect
npmstring-width8.2.2indirect
npmstrip-ansi7.2.0indirect
npmsupports-color7.2.0indirect
npmtest-exclude8.0.0indirect
npmv8-to-istanbul9.3.0indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmwrap-ansi9.0.2indirect
npmy18n5.0.8indirect
npmyargs18.1.0indirect
npmyargs-parser21.1.1indirect
npmyargs-parser22.0.0indirect
npmyocto-queue0.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 55 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
brace-expansion5.0.9indirecthigh35.0.12

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.