Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 05:58 UTC

inthhq / leadtype

Unified docs pipeline for humans & agents.

TypeScriptMIT★ 6 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗
#agents#ai#docs#llms-txt#typescript

inthhq/leadtype holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (29/100). It was last updated 2 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

InthOrganization
9 followers11 public repossince Jan 2025

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

72Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 128 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 25 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year128
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 10 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~7.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagleadtype@0.4.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases7.2
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?

29At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

11Critical
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

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_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

57Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

26At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 73% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.734

Issue & PR responsiveness

91Excellent
How it's scored
39.2/42Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
29.1/30PR acceptance — 100/103 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 19/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs100
open_issues3
closed_issues42
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.933
closed_unmerged_prs3
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
7.2/25Owner reach — 9 followers of inthhq
10.9/25Track record — 11 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_logininthhq
public_repos11
account_age_days550
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://leadtype.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagents, ai, docs, llms-txt, typescript
has_wikino
homepagehttps://leadtype.dev
docs_sitehttps://leadtype.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

41Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

41Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 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
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 19/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 25 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
1/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 59 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

70Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .claude/CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files.claude/CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,016
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

43Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — apps/astro-example/tsconfig.json, apps/c15t-example/tsconfig.json, apps/fumadocs-example/tsconfig.json, apps/next-example/tsconfig.json, apps/nuxt-example/tsconfig.json, apps/sveltekit-example/tsconfig.json, apps/tanstack/tsconfig.json, packages/leadtype/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsapps/astro-example/tsconfig.json, apps/c15t-example/tsconfig.json, apps/fumadocs-example/tsconfig.json, apps/next-example/tsconfig.json, apps/nuxt-example/tsconfig.json, apps/sveltekit-example/tsconfig.json, apps/tanstack/tsconfig.json, packages/leadtype/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
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.

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
54.3/55Manageable file sizes — 5/372 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes115,129
source_files_sampled372
oversized_source_files5

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

6GitHub stars
4contributors
128commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 05:58 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 19/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 25 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
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
0Vulnerabilities59 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 108

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 108 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@astrojs/check^0.9.4indirect
npm@astrojs/mdx^5.0.1indirect
npm@biomejs/biome2.4.14indirect
npm@changesets/changelog-github0.7.0indirect
npm@changesets/cli2.31.0indirect
npm@cloudflare/tanstack-ai^0.1.7indirect
npm@fontsource-variable/geist^5.2.8indirect
npm@fontsource-variable/geist^5.2.9indirect
npm@fontsource-variable/geist-mono^5.2.7indirect
npm@fontsource-variable/geist-mono^5.2.8indirect
npm@mdx-js/loader^3.1.1indirect
npm@mdx-js/react^3.1.1indirect
npm@mdx-js/rollup^3.1.1indirect
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk^1.29.0indirect
npm@next/mdx^16.2.6indirect
npm@nuxtjs/mdc^0.22.0indirect
npm@playwright/test^1.54.2indirect
npm@playwright/test^1.60.0indirect
npm@radix-ui/react-separator^1.1.7indirect
npm@radix-ui/react-slot^1.2.3indirect
npm@streamdown/mermaid^1.0.2indirect
npm@sveltejs/adapter-auto^6.0.0indirect
npm@sveltejs/kit^2.0.0indirect
npm@sveltejs/vite-plugin-svelte^6.0.0indirect
npm@tailwindcss/postcss^4.3.0indirect
npm@tailwindcss/vite^4.3.0indirect
npm@tanstack/ai^0.14.0indirect
npm@tanstack/ai^0.15.0indirect
npm@tanstack/ai-anthropic^0.8.2indirect
npm@tanstack/ai-client^0.8.0indirect
npm@tanstack/ai-gemini^0.10.0indirect
npm@tanstack/ai-openai^0.8.2indirect
npm@tanstack/ai-openrouter^0.8.2indirect
npm@tanstack/react-router^1.169.2indirect
npm@tanstack/react-start^1.167.65indirect
npm@types/mdast4.0.4indirect
npm@types/mdast^4.0.4indirect
npm@types/mdx^2.0.13indirect
npm@types/node^22.0.0indirect
npm@types/node^25.6.2indirect
npm@types/react^19.0.0indirect
npm@types/react^19.2.0indirect
npm@types/react-dom^19.0.0indirect
npm@types/react-dom^19.2.0indirect
npm@typescript/native-preview7.0.0-dev.20260509.2indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-react^6.0.1indirect
npm@vitest/coverage-v84.1.5indirect
npmai^6.0.168indirect
npmai^6.0.177indirect
npmastro^6.0.0indirect
npmbash-tool1.3.16indirect
npmclass-variance-authority^0.7.1indirect
npmclsx^2.1.1indirect
npmfumadocs-core^15.0.0indirect
npmfumadocs-core^16.0.0indirect
npmfumadocs-ui^16.0.0indirect
npmhusky^9.1.7indirect
npmjiti^2.7.0indirect
npmjson52.2.3indirect
npmjust-bash2.14.5indirect
npmmdast-util-mdx3.0.0indirect
npmmdast-util-mdx-jsx3.2.0indirect
npmmdast-util-mdxjs-esm2.0.1indirect
npmmdast-util-to-string4.0.0indirect
npmnext^16.2.6indirect
npmnext-mdx-remote-client^2.1.10indirect
npmnitro3.0.260429-betaindirect
npmnuxt^4.0.0indirect
npmreact^19.0.0indirect
npmreact^19.2.0indirect
npmreact-dom^19.0.0indirect
npmreact-dom^19.2.0indirect
npmrehype-slug^6.0.0indirect
npmrehype-stringify^10.0.1indirect
npmremark-frontmatter^5.0.0indirect
npmremark-gfm^4.0.1indirect
npmremark-parse^11.0.0indirect
npmremark-rehype^11.1.2indirect
npmrollup^4.40.0indirect
npmrollup-plugin-dts^6.2.1indirect
npmrollup-plugin-esbuild^6.2.1indirect
npmsatteri^0.9.3indirect
npmstreamdown^2.5.0indirect
npmsvelte^5.0.0indirect
npmsvelte-check^4.0.0indirect
npmtailwind-merge^3.5.0indirect
npmtailwind-merge^3.6.0indirect
npmtailwindcss^4.3.0indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.16indirect
npmturbo^2.9.12indirect
npmtw-animate-css^1.4.0indirect
npmtypescript6.0.3indirect
npmultracite7.6.5indirect
npmunified11.0.5indirect
npmunified^11.0.5indirect
npmunist-util-visit5.1.0indirect
npmvalibot1.4.0indirect
npmvfile^6.0.3indirect
npmvfile-matter^5.0.1indirect
npmvite^8.0.11indirect
npmvite-tsconfig-paths^6.1.1indirect
npmvitest^2.1.8indirect
npmvitest^4.1.5indirect
npmvue^3.5.0indirect
npmvue-router^5.0.6indirect
npmvue-tsc^3.1.5indirect
npmyaml^2.9.0indirect
npmzod^3.23.8indirect
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 inthhq/leadtype. Read them side by side →

98ComposioHQ/composioComposio powers 1000+ toolkits, tool search, context management, authentication, and a sandboxed workbench to help you build AI agents that turn intent into action.Exceptional98mastra-ai/mastraMastra is the modern TypeScript framework for AI-powered applications and agents.Exceptional98langchain-ai/langgraphjsFramework to build resilient language agents as graphs.Exceptional98novuhq/novuThe open-source communication infrastructure for agents and productsExceptional97strands-agents/harness-sdkBuild an agent harness and control it end-to-end. Open-source SDK for production AI agents in Python & TypeScript - any model, any cloud.Exceptional98langchain-ai/langchainThe agent engineering platform.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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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