Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-07 22:21 UTC

mikeholownych / citable

Production-grade SEO, AEO, and GEO agent skill with auditable detection, claim governance, evidence validation, and multi-agent installation.

JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

mikeholownych/citable holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (47/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
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.

73
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Mike HolownychPersonal account
0 followers27 public repossince May 2014Ethical AI Syndicate

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

70Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
17.5/18Commit volume88 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year88
human_commit_share0.966
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 12 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv1.14.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release12
mean_days_between_releases0.8

Community & Adoption

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

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
47/80Monthly downloads3,327 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@nebulacomponents/citable
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads3,327
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?

56Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance48/48 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance45/45 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs48
open_issues0
closed_issues11
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d45
prs_decided_30d45
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d45
first_time_prs_decided_30d45
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
0/25Owner reach0 followers of mikeholownych
22.5/25Track record27 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmikeholownych
public_repos27
account_age_days4,451
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 12 days ago
20/20Version history18 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@nebulacomponents/citable
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish12

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://nebulacomponents.com/resources/citable
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaeo, agent-skill, ai-search, citation-readiness, cli, evidence-governance, geo, nodejs, seo
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://nebulacomponents.com/resources/citable
docs_sitehttps://nebulacomponents.com/resources/citable
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

63Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
4.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.4

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages33
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:@nebulacomponents/citable@1.14.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 33 packages. 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.

70Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history80 of 85 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.941
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes672
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice8 of the last 88 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance3 of the last 88 commits are automated dependency updates
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.091
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.034
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/130 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes59,920
source_files_sampled130
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

1GitHub stars
1contributors
88commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

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 · 2026-08-07 22:21 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 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 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmajv^8.20.0package.json
npmajv-formats^3.0.1package.json
npmcsv-parse^7.0.1package.json
npmjs-yaml^5.2.1package.json
npmnode-html-parser^9.0.0package.json
npmpdfjs-dist^6.1.200package.json
All dependencies 33

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 27 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmajv8.20.0direct
npmajv-formats3.0.1direct
npmcsv-parse7.0.1direct
npmjs-yaml5.2.2direct
npmnode-html-parser9.0.1direct
npmpdfjs-dist6.2.108direct
npm@napi-rs/canvas1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-android-arm641.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-darwin-arm641.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-darwin-x641.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-linux-arm-gnueabihf1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-linux-arm64-gnu1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-linux-arm64-musl1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-linux-riscv64-gnu1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-linux-x64-gnu1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-linux-x64-musl1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-win32-arm64-msvc1.0.2indirect
npm@napi-rs/canvas-win32-x64-msvc1.0.2indirect
npmargparse2.0.1indirect
npmboolbase1.0.0indirect
npmcss-select5.2.2indirect
npmcss-what6.2.2indirect
npmdom-serializer2.0.0indirect
npmdomelementtype2.3.0indirect
npmdomhandler5.0.3indirect
npmdomutils3.2.2indirect
npmentities4.5.0indirect
npmentities8.0.0indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-uri3.1.4indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse1.0.0indirect
npmnth-check2.1.1indirect
npmrequire-from-string2.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:@nebulacomponents/citable@1.14.0 pulls in 33 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsnpm.