Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-24 22:35 UTC

injaneity / pi-computer-use

Let Pi control your apps on MacOS & Windows

Rust · TypeScript · SwiftMIT★ 1,769 stars⑂ 124 forkssince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗

injaneity/pi-computer-use 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 Security (52/100). It was last updated 6 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

injaneityPersonal account
49 followers38 public repossince Nov 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npm@injaneity/pi-computer-use0.5.02,2442029 days agopi-packagepi-extensionpicomputer-usemacosdesktop-automationaccessibilitylinux

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 6 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume242 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year242
human_commit_share0.94
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases22 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 29 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~7.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tagv0.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release29
mean_days_between_releases7.3

Community & Adoption

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

67Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
52.7/60Stars1,769 stars
17.4/25Forks124 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks124
stars1,769
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
44.7/80Monthly downloads2,244 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@injaneity/pi-computer-use
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads2,244
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 93% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.928
How it's scored
37.2/42Issue resolution88% of issues closed
24.5/30PR acceptance31/38 decided PRs merged
7.8/13Newcomer PR acceptance3/5 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs31
open_issues3
closed_issues23
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d9
prs_decided_30d11
issue_closed_ratio0.885
closed_unmerged_prs7
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d3
first_time_prs_decided_30d5
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
12.2/25Owner reach49 followers of injaneity
23.6/25Track record38 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers49
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logininjaneity
public_repos38
account_age_days2,845
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 29 days ago
20/20Version history20 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@injaneity/pi-computer-use
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish29

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

68Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests11 out of 13 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
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
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?

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests11 out of 13 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
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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.
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0/7.5Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.2

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.

62Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history93 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.989
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapnative/linux/bridge-rs/Cargo.toml, native/windows/bridge-rs/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance6 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsnative/linux/bridge-rs/Cargo.toml, native/windows/bridge-rs/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.06
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
52.6/55Manageable file sizes3/69 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes147,853
source_files_sampled69
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

1,769GitHub stars
9contributors
242commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
22releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 124 ⇿
0Stars
124Forks
22Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

0255075100125124132026-042026-062026-08
Major 0Minor 4Patch 18
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-24 22:34 UTC

8Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
8CI-Tests11 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 3/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
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 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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