Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 17:26 UTC

holepunchto / hello-pear-worker

The worker used in all 'hello-pear' boilerplates that use a worker

JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗

holepunchto/hello-pear-worker holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (77/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (11/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

53
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.

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

Ownership

HolepunchOrganization
1,303 followers711 public repossince Mar 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npmhello-pear-worker1.2.03,09650 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

64Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18Commit volume6 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year6
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases3 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~15.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv1.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases15.1

Community & Adoption

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

32At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
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
46.5/80Monthly downloads3,096 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageshello-pear-worker
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads3,096
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?

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 46% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth4 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.455
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance10/10 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance5/5 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs10
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d5
prs_decided_7d5
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d5
first_time_prs_decided_30d5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
22.4/25Owner reach1,303 followers of holepunchto
24/25Track record711 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,303
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginholepunchto
public_repos711
account_age_days2,003

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history5 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageshello-pear-worker
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

42Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
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
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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.

11Critical · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/1 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes2,557
source_files_sampled1
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1GitHub stars
4contributors
6commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
3releases
2bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index npm:hello-pear-worker@1.2.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 17:26 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
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
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmbare-path^3.0.1package.json
npmbare-storage^1.1.0package.json
npmcorestore^7.11.0package.json
npmframed-stream^1.0.1package.json
npmgraceful-goodbye^1.3.3package.json
npmhyperswarm^4.17.0package.json
npmpear-mobile^4.3.0package.json
npmpear-runtime^1.3.1package.json
npmwhich-runtime^1.4.0package.json
All dependencies 12

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 3 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmbare-path^3.0.1direct
npmbare-storage^1.1.0direct
npmcorestore^7.11.0direct
npmframed-stream^1.0.1direct
npmgraceful-goodbye^1.3.3direct
npmhyperswarm^4.17.0direct
npmpear-mobile^4.3.0direct
npmpear-runtime^1.3.1direct
npmwhich-runtime^1.4.0direct
npmlunte^1.2.0indirect
npmprettier^3.6.2indirect
npmprettier-config-holepunch^2.0.0indirect
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.

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.