Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 00:34 UTC

oliver-kriska / scribe

LLM-managed personal knowledge base. Auto-extracts from git repos, Claude Code sessions (via ccrider FTS5), and iMessage bookmarks. Cross-project, qmd-indexed, runs on cron

GoMIT★ 31 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗

oliver-kriska/scribe holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (99/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (36/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Oliver KriskaPersonal account
25 followers39 public repossince May 2018

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 publish
Gogithub.com/oliver-kriska/scribev0.4.2-392 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

76Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
9/36Commit cadence13/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume335 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_year335
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year13

Release discipline

96Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases39 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~6.7 days
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases4 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tagv0.4.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases6.7

Community & Adoption

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

36Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
24/60Stars31 stars
0/25Forks2 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars31
watchers0
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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

52Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 97% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.968
How it's scored
33.1/42Issue resolution79% of issues closed
17/30PR acceptance13/23 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs13
open_issues7
closed_issues26
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.788
closed_unmerged_prs10
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
10.2/25Owner reach25 followers of oliver-kriska
23.7/25Track record39 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers25
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginoliver-kriska
public_repos39
account_age_days2,991
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 go
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history39 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/oliver-kriska/scribe
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 1 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

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://getscribe.dev/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics16 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsclaude-code, cron, golang, knowledge-base, llm, markdown, qmd, personal-kb, ai-tools, bm25, cli, developer-tools, full-text-search, local-first, ollama, second-brain
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://getscribe.dev/
docs_sitehttps://getscribe.dev/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
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-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 1 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 0/29 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
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
4.5/7.5Signed-Releases4 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7
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.

99Exceptional · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt present
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes10,108
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapJustfile, Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.golangci.yml
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesJustfile, Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
54.8/55Manageable file sizes1/244 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes63,863
source_files_sampled244
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

31GitHub stars
2contributors
335commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
39releases
1bus factor
7open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.0 / 10
7.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 00:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests1 out of 1 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 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
6Signed-Releases4 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/alecthomas/kongv1.15.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-sqlite3v1.14.47go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/JohannesKaufmann/html-to-markdown/v2v2.5.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/fsnotify/fsnotifyv1.10.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/ledongthuc/pdfv0.0.0-20250511090121-5959a4027728go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0go.mod
All dependencies 10

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 3 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/alecthomas/kongv1.15.0direct
Gogithub.com/fsnotify/fsnotifyv1.10.1direct
Gogithub.com/johanneskaufmann/html-to-markdown/v2v2.5.2direct
Gogithub.com/ledongthuc/pdfv0.0.0-20250511090121-5959a4027728direct
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-sqlite3v1.14.47direct
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1direct
Gogithub.com/johanneskaufmann/domv0.3.1indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.57.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0indirect
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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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