Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 22:03 UTC

metarhia / Example

Metarhia application example for Node.js 🟢

JavaScriptMIT★ 211 stars⑂ 82 forkssince Apr 2020View on GitHub ↗

metarhia/Example holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (74/100) and lowest on Vitality (45/100). It was last updated 38 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

59
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

59
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MetarhiaOrganization · verified domain
748 followers98 public repossince Mar 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmmetarhiapoints to another repo — not scored0.0.12013663 days agometarhiacloudjstpimpressconsoleglobalstorage

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

45Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 38 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume — 14 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push38
active_weeks_last_year7
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 10 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 358 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~202.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv3.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release358
mean_days_between_releases202.4
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?

55Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
37.7/60Stars — 211 stars
15.9/25Forks — 82 forks
6.8/15Watchers — 18 watchers
Inputs used
forks82
stars211
watchers18
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 93% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 13 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled13
top_contributor_share0.933
How it's scored
27.4/42Issue resolution — 65% of issues closed
7.1/30PR acceptance — 54/227 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs54
open_issues17
closed_issues32
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.653
closed_unmerged_prs173
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 backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
20.7/25Owner reach — 748 followers of metarhia
25/25Track record — 98 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers748
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginmetarhia
public_repos98
account_age_days3,824

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://metarhia.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 13 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnodejs, node, starter-kit, server, api, project, isolation, threads, cloud, cluster, sandboxing, metarhia, metaserverless
has_wikino
homepagehttps://metarhia.com
docs_sitehttps://metarhia.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no 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
0.8/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packaging — no data
1/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, 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
advisories2
affected_packages2
assessed_packages132
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1
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 132 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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
3.2/40Legible commit history — 6 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.06
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.js
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/99 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes13,860
source_files_sampled99
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — example
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

211GitHub stars
13contributors
14commits, last 12 months
38days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
17open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • npm package 'metarhia' points at a different repository (https://github.com/metarhia/Metarhia); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 82 ⇿
0Stars
82Forks
10Releases

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.

0204060807622020-052023-052026-05
Major 2Minor 3Patch 5

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.0 / 10
4.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 22:03 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
5CI-Tests7 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 4/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmimpress^3.1.2package.json
npmmetasql^3.0.0-alpha.4package.json
npmpg^8.22.0package.json
npmredis^5.12.1package.json
All dependencies 132

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 128 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmimpress3.1.2direct
npmmetasql3.0.0-alpha.4direct
npmpg8.22.0direct
npmredis5.12.1direct
npm@eslint-community/eslint-utils4.9.0indirect
npm@eslint-community/regexpp4.12.2indirect
npm@eslint/config-array0.21.2indirect
npm@eslint/config-helpers0.4.2indirect
npm@eslint/core0.17.0indirect
npm@eslint/eslintrc3.3.6indirect
npm@eslint/js9.39.5indirect
npm@eslint/object-schema2.1.7indirect
npm@eslint/plugin-kit0.4.1indirect
npm@humanfs/core0.19.1indirect
npm@humanfs/node0.16.7indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/module-importer1.0.1indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/retry0.4.3indirect
npm@pkgr/core0.2.9indirect
npm@redis/bloom5.12.1indirect
npm@redis/client5.12.1indirect
npm@redis/json5.12.1indirect
npm@redis/search5.12.1indirect
npm@redis/time-series5.12.1indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.8indirect
npm@types/json-schema7.0.15indirect
npm@types/node24.13.3indirect
npm@types/pg8.20.4indirect
npm@types/ws8.18.1indirect
npmacorn8.18.0indirect
npmacorn-jsx5.3.2indirect
npmajv6.15.0indirect
npmansi-styles4.3.0indirect
npmargparse2.0.1indirect
npmbalanced-match1.0.2indirect
npmbrace-expansion1.1.18indirect
npmcallsites3.1.0indirect
npmchalk4.1.2indirect
npmcluster-key-slot1.1.2indirect
npmcolor-convert2.0.1indirect
npmcolor-name1.1.4indirect
npmconcat-map0.0.1indirect
npmconcolor1.1.3indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdeep-is0.1.4indirect
npmescape-string-regexp4.0.0indirect
npmeslint9.39.5indirect
npmeslint-config-metarhia9.1.9indirect
npmeslint-config-prettier10.1.8indirect
npmeslint-plugin-prettier5.5.5indirect
npmeslint-scope8.4.0indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys3.4.3indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys4.2.1indirect
npmespree10.4.0indirect
npmesquery1.6.0indirect
npmesrecurse4.3.0indirect
npmestraverse5.3.0indirect
npmesutils2.0.3indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-diff1.3.0indirect
npmfast-json-stable-stringify2.1.0indirect
npmfast-levenshtein2.0.6indirect
npmfile-entry-cache8.0.0indirect
npmfind-up5.0.0indirect
npmflat-cache4.0.1indirect
npmflatted3.4.4indirect
npmglob-parent6.0.2indirect
npmglobals14.0.0indirect
npmhas-flag4.0.0indirect
npmignore5.3.2indirect
npmimport-fresh3.3.1indirect
npmimurmurhash0.1.4indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmjs-yaml4.3.1indirect
npmjson-buffer3.0.1indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse0.4.1indirect
npmjson-stable-stringify-without-jsonify1.0.1indirect
npmkeyv4.5.4indirect
npmlevn0.4.1indirect
npmlocate-path6.0.0indirect
npmlodash.merge4.6.2indirect
npmmetacom3.2.6indirect
npmmetaconfiguration3.0.3indirect
npmmetadomain2.0.0-alpha.3indirect
npmmetalog3.1.18indirect
npmmetaschema2.2.2indirect
npmmetautil5.4.0indirect
npmmetavm1.4.5indirect
npmmetawatch1.2.4indirect
npmminimatch3.1.5indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnatural-compare1.4.0indirect
npmoptionator0.9.4indirect
npmp-limit3.1.0indirect
npmp-locate5.0.0indirect
npmparent-module1.0.1indirect
npmpath-exists4.0.0indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmpg-cloudflare1.4.0indirect
npmpg-connection-string2.14.0indirect
npmpg-int81.0.1indirect
npmpg-pool3.14.0indirect
npmpg-protocol1.15.0indirect
npmpg-types2.2.0indirect
npmpgpass1.0.5indirect
npmpostgres-array2.0.0indirect
npmpostgres-bytea1.0.0indirect
npmpostgres-date1.0.7indirect
npmpostgres-interval1.2.0indirect
npmprelude-ls1.2.1indirect
npmprettier3.8.2indirect
npmprettier3.9.6indirect
npmprettier-linter-helpers1.0.1indirect
npmpunycode2.3.1indirect
npmresolve-from4.0.0indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmsplit24.2.0indirect
npmstrip-json-comments3.1.1indirect
npmsupports-color7.2.0indirect
npmsynckit0.11.12indirect
npmtype-check0.4.0indirect
npmtypescript5.9.3indirect
npmundici-types7.18.2indirect
npmuri-js4.4.1indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmword-wrap1.2.5indirect
npmws8.21.2indirect
npmxtend4.0.2indirect
npmyocto-queue0.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 132 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
js-yaml4.3.1indirecthigh14.3.2
@humanfs/node0.16.7indirectmoderate10.16.8

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 — npm.