Public record
Software health reportschema 0.32.0 · metrics 2.7.0 · 2026-08-20 04:03 UTC

lidge-jun / opencodex

Universal provider proxy for OpenAI Codex & Claude Code — use any LLM (Claude, Gemini, Grok, DeepSeek, Ollama…) with Codex CLI, App, SDK, and Claude Code

TypeScriptMIT★ 11,353 stars⑂ 827 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolMCP serverWeb interfacehow this is determined

lidge-jun/opencodex holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (84/100) and lowest on Security (53/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

JUNPersonal account
421 followers44 public repossince Nov 2025Korea University

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?

76Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
6.2/36Commit cadence — 9/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 7,048 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year7,048
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year9

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv2.27.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.4
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?

84Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 11,353 stars
24.3/25Forks — 827 forks
6.5/15Watchers — 16 watchers
Inputs used
forks827
stars11,353
watchers16
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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
65.1/80Monthly downloads — 76,214 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@bitkyc08/opencodex
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads76,214
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
9.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 58% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.579
How it's scored
38.9/42Issue resolution — 92% of issues closed
20/30PR acceptance — 967/1,451 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/12 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs967
open_issues51
closed_issues625
prs_merged_7d34
prs_decided_7d60
prs_merged_30d34
prs_decided_30d60
issue_closed_ratio0.925
closed_unmerged_prs484
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d12
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.9/25Owner reach — 421 followers of lidge-jun
13.6/25Track record — 44 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers421
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginlidge-jun
public_repos44
account_age_days283
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 194 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@bitkyc08/opencodex
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 13 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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://opencodex.me/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsai-tools, claude, codex, gemini, llm, openai, proxy, typescript, anthropic, codex-cli, developer-tools, kiro, ai-gateway, chatgpt, claude-code, deepseek, grok, llm-proxy, ollama, openrouter
has_wikino
homepagehttps://opencodex.me/
docs_sitehttps://opencodex.me/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — 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
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): signed_releases. 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_packages8
unassessed_packages19
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 8 resolved dependencies against OSV. 19 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.

65Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/AGENTS.md, AGENTS.md, docs-site/AGENTS.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/fr/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/fr/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ja/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ja/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ko/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ko/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ru/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ru/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/tr/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/tr/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-cn/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-cn/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-tw/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-tw/reference/configuration/agents.md, gui/AGENTS.md, scripts/AGENTS.md, src/AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_files.github/AGENTS.md, AGENTS.md, docs-site/AGENTS.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/fr/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/fr/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ja/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ja/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ko/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ko/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ru/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/ru/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/tr/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/tr/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-cn/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-cn/reference/configuration/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-tw/reference/cli/agents.md, docs-site/src/content/docs/zh-tw/reference/configuration/agents.md, gui/AGENTS.md, scripts/AGENTS.md, src/AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes18,377
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — devlog/_plan/800_agent-fabric/spikes/spike-c-kernel/go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — docs-site/tsconfig.json, gui/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsdocs-site/tsconfig.json, gui/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsdevlog/_plan/800_agent-fabric/spikes/spike-c-kernel/go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes — 67/2,087 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes483,198
source_files_sampled2,087
oversized_source_files67
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files

Key facts

11,353GitHub stars
98contributors
7,048commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
51open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index npm:@bitkyc08/opencodex@2.27.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 827 ⇿
0Stars
827Forks
99Releases

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.

02004006008001,000826892026-062026-072026-08
Major 0Minor 18Patch 44
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 · 2026-08-20 04:03 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 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 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@astrojs/starlight^0.41.7docs-site/package.json
npm@fontsource-variable/geist^5.3.0docs-site/package.json
npmastro^7.2.2docs-site/package.json
npmecharts^6.1.0docs-site/package.json
npmpretendard^1.3.9docs-site/package.json
npmsharp^0.35.3docs-site/package.json
npmsimple-icons^16.28.0docs-site/package.json
npm@tanstack/react-virtual^3.14.9gui/package.json
npmreact^19.2.8gui/package.json
npmreact-dom^19.2.8gui/package.json
npm@bufbuild/protobuf^2.14.0package.json
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk^1.30.0package.json
npm@napi-rs/keyring1.3.0package.json
npmbun1.3.14package.json
npmzod4.4.3package.json
All dependencies 27

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 15 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@astrojs/starlight^0.41.7direct
npm@bufbuild/protobuf^2.14.0direct
npm@fontsource-variable/geist^5.3.0direct
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk^1.30.0direct
npm@napi-rs/keyring1.3.0direct
npm@tanstack/react-virtual^3.14.9direct
npmastro^7.2.2direct
npmbun1.3.14direct
npmecharts^6.1.0direct
npmpretendard^1.3.9direct
npmreact^19.2.8direct
npmreact-dom^19.2.8direct
npmsharp^0.35.3direct
npmsimple-icons^16.28.0direct
npmzod4.4.3direct
npm@types/bun1.3.14indirect
npm@types/estree-jsx1.0.5indirect
npm@types/node^24.13.3indirect
npm@types/react^19.2.18indirect
npm@types/react-dom^19.2.4indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-react^6.0.5indirect
npmhappy-dom20.11.2indirect
npmoxlint1.78.0indirect
npmreact-refresh^0.18.0indirect
npmtypescript7.0.2indirect
npmtypescript~6.0.2indirect
npmvite^8.2.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 8 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 19 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

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 v2.7.0, schema v0.32.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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