Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-23 09:14 UTC

mathisonian / command-exists

node module to check if a command-line command exists

JavaScriptMIT★ 147 stars⑂ 22 forkssince Sep 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

mathisonian/command-exists holds a health index of 22 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (62/100) and lowest on Vitality (13/100). It was last updated 1351 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

22
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

22
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 41 is calibrated to 36 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Matthew ConlenPersonal account
1,207 followers262 public repossince Sep 2011@midjourney

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
npmcommand-exists1.2.921,127,831162351 days agoclicommandexists

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

13Critical · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recencylast push 1,351 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.987
days_since_last_push1,351
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases15 version tags (no GitHub releases)
0/36Release recencylatest release 2,351 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~128.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count15
latest_release_tagv1.2.9
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2,351
mean_days_between_releases128.9
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.1/60Stars147 stars
11/25Forks22 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks22
stars147
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads21,127,831 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescommand-exists
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads21,127,831
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 75% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.747
How it's scored
17.7/42Issue resolution42% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance15/15 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs15
open_issues11
closed_issues8
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.421
closed_unmerged_prs0
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 backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
22.2/25Owner reach1,207 followers of mathisonian
25/25Track record262 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,207
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmathisonian
public_repos262
account_age_days5,478
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
4/35Publish recencylatest publish 2,351 days ago
20/20Version history16 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescommand-exists
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2,351

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

34At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

44Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities23 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories29
affected_packages10
assessed_packages50
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 6, moderate 2
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 50 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
14.4/40Legible commit history21 of 78 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.269
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 79
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 79 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.013
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/5 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes5,320
source_files_sampled5
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

147GitHub stars
9contributors
0commits, last 12 months
1,351days since last push
15releases
1bus factor
11open 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 ★ / 22 ⇿
0Stars
22Forks
14Releases

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.

0481216201712016-022019-072022-12
Major 1Minor 2Patch 11

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.0 / 10
3.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-23 09:13 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities23 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 50

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 50 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmbalanced-match1.0.0indirect
npmbrace-expansion1.1.11indirect
npmcli1.0.1indirect
npmcommander0.6.1indirect
npmcommander2.3.0indirect
npmconcat-map0.0.1indirect
npmconsole-browserify1.1.0indirect
npmcore-util-is1.0.2indirect
npmdate-now0.1.4indirect
npmdebug2.2.0indirect
npmdiff1.4.0indirect
npmdom-serializer0.2.2indirect
npmdomelementtype1.3.1indirect
npmdomelementtype2.0.1indirect
npmdomhandler2.3.0indirect
npmdomutils1.5.1indirect
npmentities1.0.0indirect
npmentities2.0.0indirect
npmescape-string-regexp1.0.2indirect
npmexit0.1.2indirect
npmexpect.js0.3.1indirect
npmfs.realpath1.0.0indirect
npmglob3.2.11indirect
npmglob7.1.6indirect
npmgrowl1.9.2indirect
npmhtmlparser23.8.3indirect
npminflight1.0.6indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmisarray0.0.1indirect
npmjade0.26.3indirect
npmjshint2.11.0indirect
npmlodash4.17.20indirect
npmlru-cache2.7.3indirect
npmminimatch0.3.0indirect
npmminimatch3.0.4indirect
npmminimist0.0.8indirect
npmmkdirp0.3.0indirect
npmmkdirp0.5.1indirect
npmmocha2.5.3indirect
npmms0.7.1indirect
npmonce1.4.0indirect
npmpath-is-absolute1.0.1indirect
npmreadable-stream1.1.14indirect
npmshelljs0.3.0indirect
npmsigmund1.0.1indirect
npmstring_decoder0.10.31indirect
npmstrip-json-comments1.0.4indirect
npmsupports-color1.2.0indirect
npmto-iso-string0.0.2indirect
npmwrappy1.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 10

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 50 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 10 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
growl1.9.2indirectcritical11.10.0
minimist0.0.8indirectcritical21.2.6
brace-expansion1.1.11indirecthigh55.0.9
debug2.2.0indirecthigh24.3.1
lodash4.17.20indirecthigh54.18.0
minimatch0.3.0indirecthigh510.2.3
minimatch3.0.4indirecthigh410.2.3
shelljs0.3.0indirecthigh20.8.5
diff1.4.0indirectmoderate28.0.3
ms0.7.1indirectmoderate12.0.0

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 statisticsnpm.