Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 02:14 UTC

mapbox / geojson-vt

Slice GeoJSON into vector tiles on the fly in the browser

JavaScriptISC★ 2,041 stars⑂ 280 forkssince Dec 2014View on GitHub ↗

mapbox/geojson-vt holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (90/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (41/100). It was last updated 41 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MapboxOrganization

2,777 followers866 public repossince Feb 2011

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
npm	geojson-vt	4.0.3	19,482,023	29	90 days ago	spatial geojson tiles geometry

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

51Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

29At Risk

How it's scored

18/36	Push recency — last push 41 days ago
2.1/36	Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18	Commit volume — 6 commits in the last year
1/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

commits_last_year	6
human_commit_share	0.94
days_since_last_push	41
active_weeks_last_year	3

Release discipline

84Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 15 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 90 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~329.8 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	15
latest_release_tag	v4.0.3
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	90
mean_days_between_releases	329.8

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?

90Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

87Excellent

How it's scored

53.7/60	Stars — 2,041 stars
20.4/25	Forks — 280 forks
12.5/15	Watchers — 175 watchers

Inputs used

forks	280
stars	2,041
watchers	175
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

85Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (ISC)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	2
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional

How it's scored

80/80	Monthly downloads — 19,482,023 downloads/month across npm
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	geojson-vt
dependents	—
ecosystems	npm
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	19,482,023
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?

73Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

31At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.6/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 88% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 24 contributors
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	24
top_contributor_share	0.884

Issue & PR responsiveness

73Good

How it's scored

38.5/42	Issue resolution — 92% of issues closed
20.9/30	PR acceptance — 48/69 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3

Inputs used

merged_prs	48
open_issues	10
closed_issues	111
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0.917
closed_unmerged_prs	21
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
24.8/25	Owner reach — 2,777 followers of mapbox
25/25	Track record — 866 public repos, account ~15 yr old

Inputs used

followers	2,777
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	mapbox
public_repos	866
account_age_days	5,668

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 90 days ago
20/20	Version history — 29 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	geojson-vt
ecosystems	npm
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	90

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — eslint.config.js
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
4/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

40Weak

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	no
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?

63Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

54Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
4.5/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 3 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5	Code-Review — Found 9/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
1.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
0.8/7.5	Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5	Packaging — no data
1.5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
1/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 2
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	5.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	3
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	121
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 1
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 121 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

41Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

18Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
17.6/40	Legible commit history — 31 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.33
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

54Moderate

How it's scored

0/18	One-command bootstrap
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — eslint.config.js
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 5 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
3/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	package-lock.json
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.05

Code legibility for models

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/17 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	JavaScript
largest_source_bytes	7,879
source_files_sampled	17
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

2,041GitHub stars

24contributors

6commits, last 12 months

41days since last push

15releases

1bus factor

10open issues

npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 280 ⇿

0Stars

280Forks

15Releases

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.

Major 2Minor 5Patch 8

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10

5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 02:14 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
6	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2	CI-Tests	3 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3	Code-Review	Found 9/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
6	Contributors	project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
1	Maintained	2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
3	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
2	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 2
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7	Vulnerabilities	3 existing vulnerabilities detected

All dependencies 121

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 121 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@eslint-community/eslint-utils	`4.9.1`	indirect
npm	@eslint-community/regexpp	`4.12.2`	indirect
npm	@eslint/config-array	`0.23.5`	indirect
npm	@eslint/config-helpers	`0.5.5`	indirect
npm	@eslint/core	`1.2.1`	indirect
npm	@eslint/js	`9.39.4`	indirect
npm	@eslint/object-schema	`3.0.5`	indirect
npm	@eslint/plugin-kit	`0.7.1`	indirect
npm	@humanfs/core	`0.19.2`	indirect
npm	@humanfs/node	`0.16.8`	indirect
npm	@humanfs/types	`0.15.0`	indirect
npm	@humanwhocodes/module-importer	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	@humanwhocodes/retry	`0.4.3`	indirect
npm	@jridgewell/gen-mapping	`0.3.13`	indirect
npm	@jridgewell/resolve-uri	`3.1.2`	indirect
npm	@jridgewell/source-map	`0.3.11`	indirect
npm	@jridgewell/sourcemap-codec	`1.5.5`	indirect
npm	@jridgewell/trace-mapping	`0.3.31`	indirect
npm	@rollup/plugin-terser	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-android-arm-eabi	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-android-arm64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-darwin-arm64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-darwin-x64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-freebsd-arm64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-freebsd-x64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-arm-gnueabihf	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-arm-musleabihf	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-arm64-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-arm64-musl	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-loong64-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-loong64-musl	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-ppc64-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-ppc64-musl	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-riscv64-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-riscv64-musl	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-s390x-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-x64-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-linux-x64-musl	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-openbsd-x64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-openharmony-arm64	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-win32-arm64-msvc	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-win32-ia32-msvc	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-win32-x64-gnu	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@rollup/rollup-win32-x64-msvc	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	@stylistic/eslint-plugin	`5.10.0`	indirect
npm	@types/esrecurse	`4.3.1`	indirect
npm	@types/estree	`1.0.8`	indirect
npm	@types/estree	`1.0.9`	indirect
npm	@types/json-schema	`7.0.15`	indirect
npm	@typescript-eslint/types	`8.59.3`	indirect
npm	acorn	`8.16.0`	indirect
npm	acorn-jsx	`5.3.2`	indirect
npm	ajv	`6.15.0`	indirect
npm	balanced-match	`4.0.4`	indirect
npm	benchmark	`2.1.4`	indirect
npm	brace-expansion	`5.0.6`	indirect
npm	buffer-from	`1.1.2`	indirect
npm	commander	`2.20.3`	indirect
npm	cross-spawn	`7.0.6`	indirect
npm	debug	`4.4.3`	indirect
npm	deep-is	`0.1.4`	indirect
npm	escape-string-regexp	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	eslint	`10.3.0`	indirect
npm	eslint-config-mourner	`4.1.0`	indirect
npm	eslint-scope	`9.1.2`	indirect
npm	eslint-visitor-keys	`3.4.3`	indirect
npm	eslint-visitor-keys	`4.2.1`	indirect
npm	eslint-visitor-keys	`5.0.1`	indirect
npm	espree	`10.4.0`	indirect
npm	espree	`11.2.0`	indirect
npm	esquery	`1.7.0`	indirect
npm	esrecurse	`4.3.0`	indirect
npm	estraverse	`5.3.0`	indirect
npm	esutils	`2.0.3`	indirect
npm	fast-deep-equal	`3.1.3`	indirect
npm	fast-json-stable-stringify	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	fast-levenshtein	`2.0.6`	indirect
npm	file-entry-cache	`8.0.0`	indirect
npm	find-up	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	flat-cache	`4.0.1`	indirect
npm	flatted	`3.4.2`	indirect
npm	fsevents	`2.3.3`	indirect
npm	glob-parent	`6.0.2`	indirect
npm	globals	`16.5.0`	indirect
npm	ignore	`5.3.2`	indirect
npm	imurmurhash	`0.1.4`	indirect
npm	is-extglob	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	is-glob	`4.0.3`	indirect
npm	isexe	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	json-buffer	`3.0.1`	indirect
npm	json-schema-traverse	`0.4.1`	indirect
npm	json-stable-stringify-without-jsonify	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	keyv	`4.5.4`	indirect
npm	levn	`0.4.1`	indirect
npm	locate-path	`6.0.0`	indirect
npm	lodash	`4.18.1`	indirect
npm	minimatch	`10.2.5`	indirect
npm	ms	`2.1.3`	indirect
npm	natural-compare	`1.4.0`	indirect
npm	optionator	`0.9.4`	indirect
npm	p-limit	`3.1.0`	indirect
npm	p-locate	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	path-exists	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	path-key	`3.1.1`	indirect
npm	picomatch	`4.0.4`	indirect
npm	platform	`1.3.6`	indirect
npm	prelude-ls	`1.2.1`	indirect
npm	punycode	`2.3.1`	indirect
npm	rollup	`4.60.3`	indirect
npm	serialize-javascript	`7.0.5`	indirect
npm	shebang-command	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	shebang-regex	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	smob	`1.6.1`	indirect
npm	source-map	`0.6.1`	indirect
npm	source-map-support	`0.5.21`	indirect
npm	terser	`5.47.1`	indirect
npm	type-check	`0.4.0`	indirect
npm	uri-js	`4.4.1`	indirect
npm	which	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	word-wrap	`1.2.5`	indirect
npm	yocto-queue	`0.1.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 121 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
brace-expansion	`5.0.6`	indirect	high	3	`5.0.9`

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.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records