Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-04 13:26 UTC

klarlabs-studio / roady

The plan-of-record for AI coding agents — spec, plan, and drift detection that survive context resets. File-based, git-versioned, MCP-native.

GoMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jan 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolMCP serverWeb interfacehow this is determined

klarlabs-studio/roady holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (88/100) and lowest on Security (25/100). It was last updated 5 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

KlarlabsOrganization
2 followers38 public repossince Jun 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/felixgeelhaar/roadypoints to another repo — not scoredv0.28.0-496 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
15.2/36Commit cadence — 22/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 323 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year323
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year22

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 48 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 6 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~5.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count48
latest_release_tagv0.28.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release6
mean_days_between_releases5.4

Community & Adoption

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

33At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
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
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

47Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
22.2/30PR acceptance — 82/111 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs82
open_issues0
closed_issues13
prs_merged_7d22
prs_decided_7d22
prs_merged_30d24
prs_decided_30d24
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs29
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
3.4/25Owner reach — 2 followers of klarlabs-studio
12.2/25Track record — 38 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginklarlabs-studio
public_repos38
account_age_days120

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://klarlabs-studio.github.io/roady/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 16 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagents, ai-agents, ai-coding, anthropic-claude, claude-code, cli, codex, cursor, ddd, drift-detection, golang, mcp, mcp-server, plan-of-record, planning, spec-driven-development
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://klarlabs-studio.github.io/roady/
docs_sitehttps://klarlabs-studio.github.io/roady/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
25/25Dependency lockfiles — go.sum, package-lock.json
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfilesgo.sum, package-lock.json
manifestsgo.mod, website/package.json
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno

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.

86Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md, GEMINI.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 100 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md, GEMINI.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,057
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11Static type checking — website/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configswebsite/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 2/356 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes66,993
source_files_sampled356
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
323commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
48releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Go, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • go package 'github.com/felixgeelhaar/roady' points at a different repository (https://github.com/felixgeelhaar/roady); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code 0; Skipping github.com/klarlabs-studio/roady: run: RepoClient.LocalPath: error during tarballHandler.setup: internal error: handler.httpClient.Do: Get "https://codeload.github.com/klarlabs-studio/roady/legacy.tar.gz/refs/heads/main": internal error: innerTransport.RoundTrip: internal error: innerTransport.RoundTrip: error in HTTP: dial tcp: lookup codeload.github.com on 127.0.0.11:53: server misbehaving); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Direct dependencies 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/gorilla/websocketv1.5.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isattyv0.0.22go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10go.mod
Gogo.klarlabs.de/fortifyv1.8.1go.mod
Gogo.klarlabs.de/mcpv1.28.2go.mod
Gogo.klarlabs.de/statekitv1.13.2go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
npm@astrojs/vue^7.0.1website/package.json
npmastro^7.3.5website/package.json
npmvue^3.5.0website/package.json
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 — Go.