Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 02:30 UTC

matheus3301 / herdr-phone

Mobile remote console for Herdr over Cloudflare Tunnel and Access

Go · TypeScriptMIT★ 4 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindWeb interfacehow this is determined

matheus3301/herdr-phone holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (99/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (47/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Matheus MonteiroPersonal account
62 followers86 public repossince Feb 2019@NSXBet

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 publish
Gogithub.com/matheus3301/herdr-phonev0.4.0-483 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

64Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
8.1/18Commit volume — 7 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
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 4 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 83 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv0.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release83
mean_days_between_releases1.7

Community & Adoption

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

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars — 4 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars4
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_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

54Moderate · 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
15/30PR acceptance — 1/2 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
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
12.9/25Owner reach — 62 followers of matheus3301
25/25Track record — 86 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers62
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginmatheus3301
public_repos86
account_age_days2,818
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 83 days ago
12/20Version history — 4 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/matheus3301/herdr-phone
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish83

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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://herdr.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscloudflare-tunnel, coding-agents, developer-tools, golang, herdr-plugin, mobile, pwa, react, remote-terminal
has_wikino
homepagehttps://herdr.dev
docs_sitehttps://herdr.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 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
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is 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
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 25 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.5

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.

99Exceptional · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://herdr.dev/llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://herdr.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes13,285
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, mise.toml
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.js
11/11Static type checking — web/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile, mise.toml
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsweb/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
54.8/55Manageable file sizes — 1/330 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes68,269
source_files_sampled330
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

4GitHub stars
1contributors
7commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
4releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Go, npmpackage 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 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
2Releases

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.

111222212026-072026-082026-08
Major 0Minor 2Patch 0
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 02:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests1 out of 1 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
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities25 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 22
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/BurntSushi/tomlv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/coder/websocketv1.8.14go.mod
Gogithub.com/mdp/qrterminal/v3v3.2.0go.mod
npm@fontsource-variable/public-sans^5.3.0web/package.json
npm@fontsource/ibm-plex-mono^5.3.0web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-alert-dialog^1.1.15web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-collapsible^1.1.19web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-dialog^1.1.15web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-dropdown-menu^2.1.16web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-label^2.1.7web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-scroll-area^1.2.10web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-slot^1.2.3web/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-visually-hidden^1.2.3web/package.json
npm@xterm/addon-fit^0.10.0web/package.json
npm@xterm/xterm^5.5.0web/package.json
npmclass-variance-authority^0.7.1web/package.json
npmclsx^2.1.1web/package.json
npmlucide-react^0.545.0web/package.json
npmreact^19.2.0web/package.json
npmreact-dom^19.2.0web/package.json
npmreact-router-dom^7.9.4web/package.json
npmtailwind-merge^3.3.1web/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.