Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 10:32 UTC

monperrus / crawler-user-agents

Syntactic patterns of HTTP user-agents used by bots / robots / crawlers / scrapers / spiders. pull-request welcome :star:

Go · PythonMIT★ 1,403 stars⑂ 288 forkssince Mar 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryApplicationhow this is determined

monperrus/crawler-user-agents holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (76/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (57/100). It was last updated 38 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Martin MonperrusPersonal account
356 followers506 public repossince May 2011Acme Corporation

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
Gogithub.com/monperrus/crawler-user-agentsv1.60.0-5038 days ago
npmcrawler-user-agents1.60.0277,26022838 days ago
Packagistmonperrus/crawler-user-agentsv1.60.03634938 days agojsonlistingcrawlersuser-agents
PyPIcrawler-user-agents1.62.0-8838 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 38 days ago
14.5/36Commit cadence21/52 weeks with commits
14.8/18Commit volume43 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained11 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year43
human_commit_share0.83
days_since_last_push38
active_weeks_last_year21
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases49 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 38 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~5.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count49
latest_release_tagv1.60.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release38
mean_days_between_releases5.6
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?

68Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51/60Stars1,403 stars
20.5/25Forks288 forks
8.7/15Watchers38 watchers
Inputs used
forks288
stars1,403
watchers38
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
72.6/80Monthly downloads277,623 downloads/month across go, npm, packagist, pypi
0/20Registry dependents0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/monperrus/crawler-user-agents, crawler-user-agents, monperrus/crawler-user-agents, crawler-user-agents
dependents0
ecosystemsgo, npm, packagist, pypi
total_downloads7,033
monthly_downloads277,623
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 36% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.357
How it's scored
34.6/42Issue resolution82% of issues closed
26.1/30PR acceptance346/398 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 13/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs346
open_issues11
closed_issues52
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.825
closed_unmerged_prs52
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
18.4/25Owner reach356 followers of monperrus
25/25Track record506 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers356
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmonperrus
public_repos506
account_age_days5,594
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable4 package(s) on go, npm, packagist, pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 38 days ago
20/20Version history228 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/monperrus/crawler-user-agents, crawler-user-agents, monperrus/crawler-user-agents, crawler-user-agents
ecosystemsgo, npm, packagist, pypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish38

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 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
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
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?

70Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
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
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 13/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
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
7.5/7.5Maintained11 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. 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
advisories3
affected_packages2
assessed_packages96
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 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 96 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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history67 of 83 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.807
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapgo.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
8/10Demonstrated agent practice4 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance17 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.04
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.17
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/12 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes14,640
source_files_sampled12
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,403GitHub stars
98contributors
43commits, last 12 months
38days since last push
49releases
2bus factor
11open issues
Go, npm, Packagist, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • pypi download statistics for 'crawler-user-agents' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 288 ⇿
0Stars
288Forks
45Releases

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.

05010015020025030028142014-032020-052026-07
Major 0Minor 45Patch 0

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 10:32 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
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
7Code-ReviewFound 13/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained11 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 96

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 96 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@gar/promise-retry1.0.3indirect
npm@isaacs/fs-minipass4.0.1indirect
npm@npmcli/agent4.0.0indirect
npm@npmcli/fs5.0.0indirect
npm@npmcli/git7.0.1indirect
npm@npmcli/installed-package-contents4.0.0indirect
npm@npmcli/node-gyp5.0.0indirect
npm@npmcli/package-json7.0.4indirect
npm@npmcli/promise-spawn9.0.1indirect
npm@npmcli/redact4.0.0indirect
npm@npmcli/run-script10.0.3indirect
npm@sigstore/bundle4.0.0indirect
npm@sigstore/core3.2.1indirect
npm@sigstore/protobuf-specs0.5.0indirect
npm@sigstore/sign4.1.1indirect
npm@sigstore/tuf4.0.2indirect
npm@sigstore/verify3.1.1indirect
npm@tufjs/canonical-json2.0.0indirect
npm@tufjs/models4.1.0indirect
npmabbrev4.0.0indirect
npmagent-base7.1.4indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.7indirect
npmcacache20.0.3indirect
npmchownr3.0.0indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmencoding0.1.13indirect
npmenv-paths2.2.1indirect
npmerr-code2.0.3indirect
npmexponential-backoff3.1.3indirect
npmfdir6.5.0indirect
npmfs-minipass3.0.3indirect
npmglob13.0.0indirect
npmgraceful-fs4.2.11indirect
npmhosted-git-info9.0.2indirect
npmhttp-cache-semantics4.2.0indirect
npmhttp-proxy-agent7.0.2indirect
npmhttps-proxy-agent7.0.6indirect
npmiconv-lite0.6.3indirect
npmignore-walk8.0.0indirect
npmimurmurhash0.1.4indirect
npmini6.0.0indirect
npmip-address10.4.0indirect
npmisexe3.1.1indirect
npmjson-parse-even-better-errors5.0.0indirect
npmjsonparse1.3.1indirect
npmlru-cache11.2.4indirect
npmmake-fetch-happen15.0.6indirect
npmminimatch10.2.4indirect
npmminipass3.3.6indirect
npmminipass7.1.2indirect
npmminipass-collect2.0.1indirect
npmminipass-fetch5.0.0indirect
npmminipass-flush1.0.5indirect
npmminipass-pipeline1.2.4indirect
npmminipass-sized1.0.3indirect
npmminizlib3.1.0indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnegotiator1.0.0indirect
npmnode-gyp12.1.0indirect
npmnopt9.0.0indirect
npmnpm-bundled5.0.0indirect
npmnpm-install-checks8.0.0indirect
npmnpm-normalize-package-bin5.0.0indirect
npmnpm-package-arg13.0.2indirect
npmnpm-packlist10.0.3indirect
npmnpm-pick-manifest11.0.3indirect
npmnpm-registry-fetch19.1.1indirect
npmp-map7.0.4indirect
npmpacote21.0.4indirect
npmpath-scurry2.0.1indirect
npmpicomatch4.0.4indirect
npmproc-log6.1.0indirect
npmpromise-retry2.0.1indirect
npmretry0.12.0indirect
npmsafer-buffer2.1.2indirect
npmsemver7.7.3indirect
npmsigstore4.1.1indirect
npmsmart-buffer4.2.0indirect
npmsocks2.8.7indirect
npmsocks-proxy-agent8.0.5indirect
npmspdx-correct3.2.0indirect
npmspdx-exceptions2.5.0indirect
npmspdx-expression-parse3.0.1indirect
npmspdx-license-ids3.0.22indirect
npmssri13.0.0indirect
npmtar7.5.22indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.15indirect
npmtuf-js4.1.0indirect
npmunique-filename5.0.0indirect
npmunique-slug6.0.0indirect
npmvalidate-npm-package-license3.0.4indirect
npmvalidate-npm-package-name7.0.2indirect
npmwhich6.0.0indirect
npmyallist4.0.0indirect
npmyallist5.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 96 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
brace-expansion5.0.7indirecthigh25.0.9
pacote21.0.4indirecthigh121.5.1

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 statisticsGo, npm, Packagist, PyPI.