Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 08:49 UTC

justrach / dhi

⚡ Ultra-fast data validation for Python & TypeScript. Drop-in Pydantic/Zod replacement powered by Zig + SIMD WASM.

TypeScript · Python · ZigMIT★ 386 stars⑂ 6 forkssince Oct 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

justrach/dhi holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (85/100) and lowest on Security (34/100). It was last updated 20 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

RachPersonal account
307 followers210 public repossince Aug 2019

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?

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 20 days ago
15.9/36Commit cadence — 23/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 269 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 15 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year269
human_commit_share0.93
days_since_last_push20
active_weeks_last_year23

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 18 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 20 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~10.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tagv1.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release20
mean_days_between_releases10.1
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
41.9/60Stars — 386 stars
5.8/25Forks — 6 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars386
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
50.1/80Monthly downloads — 5,738 downloads/month across npm, pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdhi, dhi
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm, pypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,738
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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.996
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.1/30PR acceptance — 64/66 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs64
open_issues0
closed_issues16
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
17.9/25Owner reach — 307 followers of justrach
25/25Track record — 210 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers307
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginjustrach
public_repos210
account_age_days2,582
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on npm, pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 20 days ago
20/20Version history — 40 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdhi, dhi
ecosystemsnpm, pypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish20

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

85Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.mjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 14 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://trilok.ai
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbun, python, typescript, zig
has_wikino
homepagehttps://trilok.ai
docs_sitehttps://trilok.ai
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

34At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 14 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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 — 15 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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 — 138 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

82Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.pydantic.dev/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 83 of 93 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.pydantic.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.892
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes4,529
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.mjs
11/11Static type checking — js-bindings/examples/cloudflare-workers/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/examples/durable-agent/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/examples/frontend/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/tsconfig.json, tools/ts-to-dhi/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 36 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsjs-bindings/examples/cloudflare-workers/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/examples/durable-agent/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/examples/frontend/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/tsconfig.json, js-bindings/tsconfig.json, tools/ts-to-dhi/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.36
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
53.1/55Manageable file sizes — 4/118 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes270,217
source_files_sampled118
oversized_source_files4
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/complex-sdk/openapi.json, js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/my-sdk/openapi.json, js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/test-output/openapi.json
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesjs-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/complex-sdk/openapi.json, js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/my-sdk/openapi.json, js-bindings/packages/dhi-sdk/test-output/openapi.json
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

386GitHub stars
2contributors
269commits, last 12 months
20days since last push
18releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npm, PyPIpackage 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 ★ / 6 ⇿
0Stars
6Forks
10Releases

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.

123456622026-032026-042026-06
Major 0Minor 2Patch 8
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.4 / 10
3.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-20 08:49 UTC

8Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests14 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained15 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
0Vulnerabilities138 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 statistics — npm, PyPI.