Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-23 01:24 UTC

moostjs / atscript-db

AtScript database adapters and Moost DB integration

TypeScriptNo license detected★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined

moostjs/atscript-db holds a health index of 45 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Vitality (80/100) and lowest on Security (26/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

45
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.

45
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 47 is calibrated to 45 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

moostjsOrganization
2 followers7 public repossince Nov 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npm@atscript/db0.1.1245,371875 days agoatscriptdatabaseutils
npm@atscript/db-mongo0.1.1243,365875 days agoatscriptmongodbplugin
npm@atscript/db-mysql0.1.1243,391875 days agoatscriptdatabasemysql
npm@atscript/moost-db0.1.1243,781935 days agoannotationsatscriptdatabasemoosttypescript
npm@atscript/db-client0.1.1244,963825 days agoatscriptclientdatabasehttprest
npm@atscript/db-memory0.1.1242,598125 days agoatscriptdatabasememory
npm@atscript/db-sqlite0.1.1243,322975 days agoatscriptdatabasesqlite
npm@atscript/db-postgres0.1.1243,469875 days agoatscriptdatabasepgvectorpostgrespostgresql

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

80Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

74Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence — 15/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 248 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year248
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year15

Release discipline

88Excellent
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 85 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 5 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count85
latest_release_tagv0.1.124
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release5
mean_days_between_releases0.8
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?

28At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 1 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

25At Risk
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

75Good
How it's scored
59.7/80Monthly downloads — 30,260 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@atscript/db, @atscript/db-mongo, @atscript/db-mysql, @atscript/moost-db, @atscript/db-client, @atscript/db-memory, @atscript/db-sqlite, @atscript/db-postgres
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads30,260
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?

41Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

20At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

1Critical
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

59Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
3.4/25Owner reach — 2 followers of moostjs
14/25Track record — 7 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginmoostjs
public_repos7
account_age_days1,352
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 8 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 5 days ago
20/20Version history — 97 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@atscript/db, @atscript/db-mongo, @atscript/db-mysql, @atscript/moost-db, @atscript/db-client, @atscript/db-memory, @atscript/db-sqlite, @atscript/db-postgres
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish5

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

30At Risk
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-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

26At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

26At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate2.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

68Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

78Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md, packages/db-mongo/CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32.5/40Legible commit history — 61 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.61
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md, packages/db-mongo/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,058

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

48Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — packages/db-client/tsconfig.json, packages/db-memory/tsconfig.json, packages/db-mongo/tsconfig.json, packages/db-mysql/tsconfig.json, packages/db-postgres/tsconfig.json, packages/db-sql-tools/tsconfig.json, packages/db-sqlite/tsconfig.json, packages/db/tsconfig.json, packages/moost-db/tsconfig.json, 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
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspackages/db-client/tsconfig.json, packages/db-memory/tsconfig.json, packages/db-mongo/tsconfig.json, packages/db-mysql/tsconfig.json, packages/db-postgres/tsconfig.json, packages/db-sql-tools/tsconfig.json, packages/db-sqlite/tsconfig.json, packages/db/tsconfig.json, packages/moost-db/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
53.9/55Manageable file sizes — 7/361 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes119,552
source_files_sampled361
oversized_source_files7

Key facts

1GitHub stars
1contributors
248commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
85releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index npm:@atscript/db@0.1.124; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.6 / 10
2.6aggregate

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 · 2026-07-23 01:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@uniqu/urlcatalog:packages/db-client/package.json
npm@atscript/db-memoryworkspace:^packages/moost-db/package.json
npm@uniqu/urlcatalog:packages/moost-db/package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with moostjs/atscript-db. Read them side by side →

96mikro-orm/mikro-ormTypeScript ORM for Node.js based on Data Mapper, Unit of Work and Identity Map patterns. Supports MongoDB, MySQL, MariaDB, MS SQL Server, PostgreSQL and SQLite/libSQL databases.Exceptional98typeorm/typeormTypeScript & JavaScript ORM for Node.js — supports PostgreSQL, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite, SQL Server, Oracle, and more.Exceptional100supabase/supabase-jsAn isomorphic Javascript client for Supabase. Query your Supabase database, subscribe to realtime events, upload and download files, browse typescript examples, invoke postgres functions via rpc, invoke supabase edge functions, query pgvector.Exceptional99metabase/metabaseThe easy-to-use open source Business Intelligence and Embedded Analytics tool that lets everyone work with data :bar_chart:Exceptional98googleapis/mcp-toolboxMCP Toolbox for Databases is an open source MCP server for databases.Exceptional97supabase/supabaseThe Postgres development platform. Supabase gives you a dedicated Postgres database to build your web, mobile, and AI applications.Exceptional

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 v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm.