Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 02:49 UTC

metalama / Metalama.Community

Community contributions to Metalama that are not covered by the same support and licensing conditions as Metalama itself

C# · PowerShellCustom license★ 6 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Dec 2022View on GitHub ↗

metalama/Metalama.Community holds a health index of 47 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (63/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (29/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

47
overall / 100
Weak

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.

47
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 48 is calibrated to 47 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MetalamaOrganization · verified domain
20 followers14 public repossince Jan 2025

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

56Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence42/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume330 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year330
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year42
How it's scored
0/27Ships releasesno releases published
0/36Release recencyno releases
0/27Release cadenceno releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count0
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?

29At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
11.3/60Stars6 stars
2.5/25Forks3 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars6
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
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

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 53% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth8 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.533
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
29/30PR acceptance91/94 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs91
open_issues0
closed_issues16
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs3
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
9.5/25Owner reach20 followers of metalama
11.8/25Track record14 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers20
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginmetalama
public_repos14
account_age_days586

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

30At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://metalama.net
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics1 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmetalama
has_wikino
homepagehttps://metalama.net
docs_sitehttps://metalama.net
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
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-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 4 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
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, 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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages20
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 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 20 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://metalama.net/llms.txt)
18.7/40Legible commit history35 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://metalama.net/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.35
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes6,568
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap.teamcity/pom.xml, eng/src/BuildMetalamaCommunity.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.TestApp/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.TestApp.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
8/10Demonstrated agent practice4 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.04
toolchain_manifests.teamcity/pom.xml, eng/src/BuildMetalamaCommunity.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.TestApp/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.TestApp.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.UnitTests/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.UnitTests.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken/Metalama.Community.AutoCancellationToken.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Costura/Metalama.Community.Costura.TestApp/Metalama.Community.Costura.TestApp.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Costura/Metalama.Community.Costura.Tests/Metalama.Community.Costura.Tests.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Costura/Metalama.Community.Costura.Weaver/Metalama.Community.Costura.Weaver.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Costura/Metalama.Community.Costura.WpfApp/Metalama.Community.Costura.WpfApp.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Costura/Metalama.Community.Costura/Metalama.Community.Costura.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.Demo/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.Demo.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.TestApp/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.TestApp/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.TestApp.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.TestApp/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.TestRunner/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.TestRunner.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.UnitTests/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.UnitTests.csproj, src/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity/Metalama.Community.Virtuosity.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC# (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/86 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes20,358
source_files_sampled86
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

6GitHub stars
8contributors
330commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch maven package 'Metalama_Metalama20261_MetalamaCommunity:Metalama_Metalama20261_MetalamaCommunity_dsl' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks

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.

12233312023-042023-052023-05
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 · 2026-09-06 02:49 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.jetbrains.teamcity:configs-dsl-kotlin-latest${teamcity.dsl.version}.teamcity/pom.xml
Mavenorg.jetbrains.teamcity:configs-dsl-kotlin-plugins-latest1.0-SNAPSHOT.teamcity/pom.xml
Mavenorg.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-stdlib-jdk8${kotlin.version}.teamcity/pom.xml
Mavenorg.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-script-runtime${kotlin.version}.teamcity/pom.xml
NuGetPostSharp.Engineering.BuildToolseng/src/BuildMetalamaCommunity.csproj
All dependencies 21

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 16 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavenorg.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-script-runtimedirect
Mavenorg.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-stdlib-jdk8direct
Mavenorg.jetbrains.teamcity:configs-dsl-kotlin-latestdirect
Mavenorg.jetbrains.teamcity:configs-dsl-kotlin-plugins-latest1.0-SNAPSHOTdirect
NuGetPostSharp.Engineering.BuildToolsdirect
Mavenorg.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-maven-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.jetbrains.teamcity:teamcity-configs-maven-pluginindirect
NuGetJetBrains.Annotationsindirect
NuGetMetalama.Community.AutoCancellationTokenindirect
NuGetMetalama.Community.Virtuosityindirect
NuGetMetalama.Frameworkindirect
NuGetMetalama.Framework.Sdkindirect
NuGetMetalama.Testing.AspectTestingindirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharpindirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdkindirect
NuGetMoqindirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Jsonindirect
NuGetSoothsilver.Randomindirect
NuGetxunitindirect
NuGetxunit.assertindirect
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudioindirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 20 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.