Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 22:00 UTC

ncukondo / reference-manager

A local reference management tool using CSL-JSON as the single source of truth

TypeScriptNo license detected★ 4 stars⑂ 1 forksince Dec 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindMCP serverLibraryCommand-line toolTerminal interfacehow this is determined

ncukondo/reference-manager holds a health index of 56 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (23/100). It was last updated 8 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

56
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.

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

Ownership

Takeshi KondoPersonal account
1 follower81 public repossince Feb 2016

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
npm@ncukondo/reference-manager0.35.0572748 days agoreference-managercsl-jsonbibliographypandoccitation

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 8 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence20/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume732 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained15 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year732
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push8
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases72 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 8 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~13 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count72
latest_release_tagv0.35.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release8
mean_days_between_releases13

Community & Adoption

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

23At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars4 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars4
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5Licenseno 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
How it's scored
36.8/80Monthly downloads572 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@ncukondo/reference-manager
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads572
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?

55Moderate · 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
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
39.2/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance90/90 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs90
open_issues1
closed_issues14
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.933
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): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
2.2/25Owner reach1 followers of ncukondo
25/25Track record81 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers1
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginncukondo
public_repos81
account_age_days3,821
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 8 days ago
20/20Version history74 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@ncukondo/reference-manager
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish8

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configbiome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

28At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests9 out of 9 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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0/2.5Licenselicense file not detected
7.5/7.5Maintained15 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
1/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities80 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate2.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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.

70Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,033
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configbiome.json
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/424 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes48,482
source_files_sampled424
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

4GitHub stars
1contributors
732commits, last 12 months
8days since last push
72releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index npm:@ncukondo/reference-manager@0.35.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.9 / 10
2.9aggregate

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 · 2026-07-20 21:59 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests9 out of 9 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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
10Maintained15 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities80 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 25
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@citation-js/core^0.7.16package.json
npm@citation-js/plugin-bibtex^0.7.21package.json
npm@citation-js/plugin-csl^0.7.16package.json
npm@citation-js/plugin-doi^0.7.21package.json
npm@citation-js/plugin-isbn^0.4.0package.json
npm@citation-js/plugin-ris^0.7.21package.json
npm@iarna/toml^2.2.5package.json
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk^1.25.1package.json
npm@mozilla/readability^0.6.0package.json
npm@ncukondo/academic-fulltext^0.2.6package.json
npmchokidar^5.0.0package.json
npmcommander^12.1.0package.json
npmenv-paths^3.0.0package.json
npmhono^4.11.1package.json
npmink^6.6.0package.json
npmink-ui^0.4.0package.json
npmjs-yaml^4.1.1package.json
npmplaywright-core^1.58.2package.json
npmreact^19.2.3package.json
npmtabtab^3.0.2package.json
npmturndown^7.2.2package.json
npmturndown-plugin-gfm^1.0.2package.json
npmwrite-file-atomic^7.0.0package.json
npmyaml^2.8.2package.json
npmzod^4.1.13package.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.

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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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