Public recordModerate
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 02:25 UTC
janrito / rbtr
Language-agnostic structural code intelligence for humans and clankers
janrito/rbtr holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (84/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.
59
overall / 100Software 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.
59
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)
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
Alejandro GiacomettiPersonal account
74 followers33 public repossince Oct 2008@Beauhurst
This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
80
Development activity
74Good
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 4 days ago |
| 9.7/36 | Commit cadence — 14/52 weeks with commits |
| 18/18 | Commit volume — 342 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 342 |
| human_commit_share | — |
| days_since_last_push | 4 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 14 |
Release discipline
90Excellent
How it's scored
| 27/27 | Ships releases — 12 releases published |
| 36/36 | Release recency — latest release 18 days ago |
| 27/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~10.3 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 12 |
| latest_release_tag | v2026.6.2-dev0 |
| releases_from_tags | no |
| days_since_latest_release | 18 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 10.3 |
Community & Adoption
Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?
24
Popularity & adoption
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/60 | Stars — 1 stars |
| 0/25 | Forks — 0 forks |
| 0/15 | Watchers — 0 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 0 |
| stars | 1 |
| watchers | 0 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 22.5/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (MIT) |
| 0/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 0/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 0/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | yes |
| has_license | yes |
| readme_badges | — |
| has_contributing | no |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | — |
| has_pull_request_template | no |
Sustainability & Governance
Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?
44
Maintainer resilience (bus factor)
22At Risk
How it's scored
| 9/54 | Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 0.3/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits |
| 2.7/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 2 contributors |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 1 |
| contributors_sampled | 2 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.988 |
Issue & PR responsiveness
58Moderate
How it's scored
| 0/42 | Issue resolution — no issues or no data |
| 26.1/30 | PR acceptance — 66/76 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 0/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 66 |
| open_issues | 0 |
| closed_issues | 0 |
| prs_merged_7d | — |
| prs_decided_7d | — |
| prs_merged_30d | — |
| prs_decided_30d | — |
| issue_closed_ratio | — |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 10 |
| first_time_authors_30d | — |
| first_time_prs_merged_30d | — |
| first_time_prs_decided_30d | — |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
Ownership & stewardship
58Moderate
How it's scored
| 10/30 | Ownership backing — personal (user) account |
| 0/20 | Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts |
| 13.5/25 | Owner reach — 74 followers of janrito |
| 23.2/25 | Track record — 33 public repos, account ~17 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 74 |
| owner_type | User |
| is_verified | — |
| owner_login | janrito |
| public_repos | 33 |
| account_age_days | 6,470 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
78
Engineering practices
90Excellent
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 3 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 16/16 | Linter config — biome.json |
| 0/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 6.4/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | yes |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| has_precommit_config | no |
Documentation
60Moderate
How it's scored
| 30/30 | README |
| 0/25 | Documentation directory |
| 0/15 | Documentation / homepage site |
| 10/10 | Repository description |
| 10/10 | Topics — 7 topics |
| 10/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | clanker, code, pi, semantic-search, skills, tree-sitter, vibecoding |
| has_wiki | yes |
| homepage | — |
| docs_site | — |
| has_readme | yes |
| has_docs_dir | no |
| has_description | yes |
Security
Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?
45
Security posture
45Weak
How it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 2.2/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 2.5/2.5 | Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected |
| 0/5 | Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 5/5 | Packaging — packaging workflow detected |
| 0/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0/5 | SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0/5 | Security-Policy — security policy file not detected |
| 0/7.5 | Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| 0/7.5 | Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 32 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 18 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 0 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 4.5 |
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.
84
Agent context & guidance
75Good
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Agent instructions — AGENTS.md |
| 0/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) |
| 0/40 | Legible commit history — no data |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | no |
| llms_txt_url | — |
| legible_history_share | — |
| agent_instruction_files | AGENTS.md |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | 6,136 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)
86Excellent
How it's scored
| 18/18 | One-command bootstrap — justfile |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 11/11 | Lint / format config — biome.json |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — packages/pi-rbtr/tsconfig.json, packages/rbtr-eval/src/rbtr_eval/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-bash/src/rbtr_lang_bash/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-c/src/rbtr_lang_c/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-cpp/src/rbtr_lang_cpp/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-css/src/rbtr_lang_css/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-go/src/rbtr_lang_go/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-hcl/src/rbtr_lang_hcl/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-html/src/rbtr_lang_html/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-java/src/rbtr_lang_java/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-javascript/src/rbtr_lang_javascript/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-json/src/rbtr_lang_json/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-less/src/rbtr_lang_less/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-markdown/src/rbtr_lang_markdown/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-python/src/rbtr_lang_python/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-rst/src/rbtr_lang_rst/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-ruby/src/rbtr_lang_ruby/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-rust/src/rbtr_lang_rust/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-scss/src/rbtr_lang_scss/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-sql/src/rbtr_lang_sql/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-svelte/src/rbtr_lang_svelte/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-toml/src/rbtr_lang_toml/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-tree-sitter-query/src/rbtr_lang_tree_sitter_query/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-vue/src/rbtr_lang_vue/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-yaml/src/rbtr_lang_yaml/py.typed, packages/rbtr/src/rbtr/py.typed |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — lockfile |
| 0/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — no data |
| 5/8 | Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | uv.lock |
| has_dockerfile | no |
| typed_language | no |
| bootstrap_files | justfile |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| typecheck_configs | packages/pi-rbtr/tsconfig.json, packages/rbtr-eval/src/rbtr_eval/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-bash/src/rbtr_lang_bash/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-c/src/rbtr_lang_c/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-cpp/src/rbtr_lang_cpp/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-css/src/rbtr_lang_css/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-go/src/rbtr_lang_go/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-hcl/src/rbtr_lang_hcl/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-html/src/rbtr_lang_html/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-java/src/rbtr_lang_java/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-javascript/src/rbtr_lang_javascript/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-json/src/rbtr_lang_json/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-less/src/rbtr_lang_less/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-markdown/src/rbtr_lang_markdown/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-python/src/rbtr_lang_python/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-rst/src/rbtr_lang_rst/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-ruby/src/rbtr_lang_ruby/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-rust/src/rbtr_lang_rust/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-scss/src/rbtr_lang_scss/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-sql/src/rbtr_lang_sql/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-svelte/src/rbtr_lang_svelte/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-toml/src/rbtr_lang_toml/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-tree-sitter-query/src/rbtr_lang_tree_sitter_query/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-vue/src/rbtr_lang_vue/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-yaml/src/rbtr_lang_yaml/py.typed, packages/rbtr/src/rbtr/py.typed |
| agent_commit_share | — |
| toolchain_manifests | — |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
Code legibility for models
82Excellent
How it's scored
| 27/45 | Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (packages/pi-rbtr/tsconfig.json, packages/rbtr-eval/src/rbtr_eval/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-bash/src/rbtr_lang_bash/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-c/src/rbtr_lang_c/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-cpp/src/rbtr_lang_cpp/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-css/src/rbtr_lang_css/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-go/src/rbtr_lang_go/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-hcl/src/rbtr_lang_hcl/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-html/src/rbtr_lang_html/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-java/src/rbtr_lang_java/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-javascript/src/rbtr_lang_javascript/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-json/src/rbtr_lang_json/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-less/src/rbtr_lang_less/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-markdown/src/rbtr_lang_markdown/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-python/src/rbtr_lang_python/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-rst/src/rbtr_lang_rst/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-ruby/src/rbtr_lang_ruby/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-rust/src/rbtr_lang_rust/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-scss/src/rbtr_lang_scss/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-sql/src/rbtr_lang_sql/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-svelte/src/rbtr_lang_svelte/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-toml/src/rbtr_lang_toml/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-tree-sitter-query/src/rbtr_lang_tree_sitter_query/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-vue/src/rbtr_lang_vue/py.typed, packages/rbtr-lang-yaml/src/rbtr_lang_yaml/py.typed, packages/rbtr/src/rbtr/py.typed) |
| 55/55 | Manageable file sizes — 0/372 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Python |
| largest_source_bytes | 55,088 |
| source_files_sampled | 372 |
| oversized_source_files | 0 |
Machine-readable interfaces
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 40/40 | API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — skills/review-github-pr/queries/add_comment.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/add_review.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/add_thread_reply.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/delete_comment.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/delete_review.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/fetch_pr.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/fetch_review_comments.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/pr_id.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/resolve_thread.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/submit_review.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/update_comment.graphql |
| 0/20 | MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software |
| 40/40 | Runnable examples — example, samples |
Inputs used
| example_dirs | example, samples |
| has_mcp_signal | no |
| api_schema_files | skills/review-github-pr/queries/add_comment.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/add_review.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/add_thread_reply.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/delete_comment.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/delete_review.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/fetch_pr.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/fetch_review_comments.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/pr_id.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/resolve_thread.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/submit_review.graphql, skills/review-github-pr/queries/update_comment.graphql |
| interfaces_expected_of | — |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.
Key facts
1GitHub stars
2contributors
342commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
More detail
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate
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).
| 10 | Binary-Artifacts | no binaries found in the repo |
| 3 | Branch-Protection | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0 | Code-Review | Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | Contributors | project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 10 | Dependency-Update-Tool | update tool detected |
| 0 | Fuzzing | project is not fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 10 | Maintained | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 10 | Packaging | packaging workflow detected |
| 0 | Pinned-Dependencies | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0 | SAST | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0 | Security-Policy | security policy file not detected |
| 0 | Signed-Releases | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| 0 | Token-Permissions | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0 | Vulnerabilities | 32 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.
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.
How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.