Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 03:13 UTC

kurone-kito / lints-config

⚙️ My configuration for the Biome, Commitlint, CSpell and others; since 2023.3

JavaScript · ShellMIT★ 5 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2023View on GitHub ↗

kurone-kito/lints-config holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (54/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

262 followers66 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@kurone-kito/biome-config0.23.04,5252724 days agobiomeconfig
npm@kurone-kito/cspell-config0.23.04,4656424 days agoconfigcspell
npm@kurone-kito/commitlint-config0.23.03,5136024 days agocommitlintconfig
npm@kurone-kito/lint-staged-config0.23.03,4576024 days agobiomeconfigcspelllint-staged
npm@kurone-kito/markdownlint-config0.23.04,4275824 days agoconfigmarkdownlint

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence — 18/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 369 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year369
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year18
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 29 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 24 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~81.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count29
latest_release_tagv0.23.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release24
mean_days_between_releases81.2

Community & Adoption

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

54Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
9.8/60Stars — 5 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars5
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
57.5/80Monthly downloads — 20,387 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@kurone-kito/biome-config, @kurone-kito/cspell-config, @kurone-kito/commitlint-config, @kurone-kito/lint-staged-config, @kurone-kito/markdownlint-config
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads20,387
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?

58Moderate · 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
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
18/30PR acceptance — 155/258 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs155
open_issues0
closed_issues79
prs_merged_7d13
prs_decided_7d13
prs_merged_30d28
prs_decided_30d30
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs103
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
17.4/25Owner reach — 262 followers of kurone-kito
25/25Track record — 66 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers262
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginkurone-kito
public_repos66
account_age_days2,874
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 5 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 24 days ago
20/20Version history — 64 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@kurone-kito/biome-config, @kurone-kito/cspell-config, @kurone-kito/commitlint-config, @kurone-kito/lint-staged-config, @kurone-kito/markdownlint-config
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish24

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 12 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmy-config, npm-package, biome-config, commitlint-config, cspell, lint-staged-config, markdownlint-config
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?

70Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 6 out of 6 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate6.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages16
unassessed_packages6
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 16 resolved dependencies against OSV. 6 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

76Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-advisory-wait.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-ci.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-claim.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-discover.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-merge-handoff.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-merge.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-overview-appendix.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-overview-core.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-pr-submit.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-pre-merge.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-resume-stall.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-resume.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-review-fix.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-review-snapshot.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-review-triage.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-roadmap-audit.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-suitability.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-work.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-advisory-wait-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-ci-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-claim-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-merge-handoff-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-pr-submit-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-pre-merge-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-resume-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-resume-stall-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-review-fix-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-review-snapshot-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-work-lite.instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, GEMINI.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-advisory-wait.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-ci.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-claim.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-discover.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-merge-handoff.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-merge.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-overview-appendix.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-overview-core.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-pr-submit.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-pre-merge.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-resume-stall.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-resume.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-review-fix.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-review-snapshot.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-review-triage.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-roadmap-audit.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-suitability.instructions.md, .github/instructions/idd-work.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-advisory-wait-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-ci-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-claim-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-merge-handoff-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-pr-submit-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-pre-merge-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-resume-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-resume-stall-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-review-fix-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-review-snapshot-lite.instructions.md, .github/instructions/lite/idd-work-lite.instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, GEMINI.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes35,990
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — packages/commitlint-config/tsconfig.json, packages/lint-staged-config/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 41 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspackages/commitlint-config/tsconfig.json, packages/lint-staged-config/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.41
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript with type-check config (packages/commitlint-config/tsconfig.json, packages/lint-staged-config/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/8 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes5,358
source_files_sampled8
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

5GitHub stars
1contributors
369commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
29releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 03:12 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 22

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 22 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@commitlint/config-conventional^21.2.2indirect
npm@kurone-kito/typescript-config^0.22.0-alpha.9indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.android-arm6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.android-x6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.darwin-arm6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.darwin-x6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.freebsd-x6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-arm6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-arm64-musl12.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-ppc6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-riscv6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-s390x12.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-x6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-x64-musl12.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.win32-arm6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.win32-x6412.4.0indirect
npm@pnpm/plugin-types-fixer0.1.0indirect
npmcpy-cli^7.0.0indirect
npmjs-yaml^5.3.0indirect
npmpnpm12.4.0indirect
npmrimraf^6.1.3indirect
npmtypescript~7.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 16 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 6 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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.