Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 02:44 UTC

ryersondmp / sa11y

Sa11y is an accessibility quality assurance tool that visually highlights common accessibility and usability issues. Geared towards content authors, Sa11y straightforwardly identifies errors or warnings at the source with a simple tooltip on how to fix them.

JavaScript · HTMLCustom license★ 332 stars⑂ 47 forkssince Mar 2020View on GitHub ↗

ryersondmp/sa11y holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (85/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (52/100). It was last updated 26 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

4 followers4 public repossince Mar 2020Toronto Metropolitan University

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
npmsa11y5.0.914,2416937 days agosa11ya11yjavascriptaccessibility

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 26 days ago
9/36Commit cadence13/52 weeks with commits
13.6/18Commit volume32 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year32
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push26
active_weeks_last_year13

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases94 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 37 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~24.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count94
latest_release_tag5.0.9
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release37
mean_days_between_releases24.3
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?

63Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
40.9/60Stars332 stars
13.9/25Forks47 forks
4.3/15Watchers7 watchers
Inputs used
forks47
stars332
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.4/80Monthly downloads14,241 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessa11y
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads14,241
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
3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 86% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.865
How it's scored
40.9/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
25.7/30PR acceptance78/91 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs78
open_issues2
closed_issues77
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.975
closed_unmerged_prs13
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
5/25Owner reach4 followers of ryersondmp
17.1/25Track record4 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginryersondmp
public_repos4
account_age_days2,371
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 37 days ago
20/20Version history69 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessa11y
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish37

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

85Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configbiome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://sa11y.netlify.app
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaccessibility, accessibility-checker, accessibility-testing, a11y
has_wikino
homepagehttps://sa11y.netlify.app
docs_sitehttps://sa11y.netlify.app
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

59Moderate · 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
1.5/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4/5SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
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_packages3
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:sa11y@5.0.9 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 3 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.

52Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.8/40Legible commit history69 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.69
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configbiome.json
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
52.4/55Manageable file sizes10/208 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes384,399
source_files_sampled208
oversized_source_files10
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

332GitHub stars
3contributors
32commits, last 12 months
26days since last push
94releases
1bus factor
2open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 47 ⇿
0Stars
47Forks
94Releases

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.

010203040504732020-052023-072026-08
Major 2Minor 9Patch 80

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-06 02:44 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
6CI-Tests8 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained3 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
8SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@floating-ui/dom^1.7.6package.json
All dependencies 108

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 107 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@floating-ui/dom1.8.0direct
npm@biomejs/biome2.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-darwin-arm642.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-darwin-x642.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-linux-arm642.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-linux-arm64-musl2.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-linux-x642.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-linux-x64-musl2.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-win32-arm642.5.6indirect
npm@biomejs/cli-win32-x642.5.6indirect
npm@esbuild/aix-ppc640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/android-arm0.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/android-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/android-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/darwin-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/darwin-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/freebsd-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/freebsd-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-arm0.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-ia320.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-loong640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-mips64el0.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-ppc640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-riscv640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-s390x0.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/netbsd-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/netbsd-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/openbsd-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/openbsd-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/openharmony-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/sunos-x640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/win32-arm640.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/win32-ia320.28.1indirect
npm@esbuild/win32-x640.28.1indirect
npm@floating-ui/core1.8.0indirect
npm@floating-ui/utils0.2.12indirect
npm@playwright/test1.62.0indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-android-arm-eabi4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-android-arm644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-darwin-arm644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-darwin-x644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-freebsd-arm644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-freebsd-x644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm-gnueabihf4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm-musleabihf4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm64-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-arm64-musl4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-loong64-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-loong64-musl4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-ppc64-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-ppc64-musl4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-riscv64-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-riscv64-musl4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-s390x-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-x64-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-linux-x64-musl4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-openbsd-x644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-openharmony-arm644.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-arm64-msvc4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-ia32-msvc4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-x64-gnu4.62.3indirect
npm@rollup/rollup-win32-x64-msvc4.62.3indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.9indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbaseline-browser-mapping2.11.7indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.9indirect
npmbrowserslist4.28.7indirect
npmcaniuse-lite1.0.30001806indirect
npmdetect-libc2.1.2indirect
npmelectron-to-chromium1.5.398indirect
npmesbuild0.28.1indirect
npmescalade3.2.0indirect
npmfdir6.5.0indirect
npmfsevents2.3.2indirect
npmfsevents2.3.3indirect
npmglob13.0.6indirect
npmlightningcss1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-android-arm641.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-darwin-arm641.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-darwin-x641.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-freebsd-x641.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-arm-gnueabihf1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-arm64-gnu1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-arm64-musl1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-x64-gnu1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-x64-musl1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-win32-arm64-msvc1.33.0indirect
npmlightningcss-win32-x64-msvc1.33.0indirect
npmlru-cache11.5.2indirect
npmminimatch10.2.6indirect
npmminipass7.1.3indirect
npmnanoid3.3.16indirect
npmnode-releases2.0.51indirect
npmpackage-json-from-dist1.0.1indirect
npmpath-scurry2.0.2indirect
npmpicocolors1.1.1indirect
npmpicomatch4.0.5indirect
npmplaywright1.62.0indirect
npmplaywright-core1.62.0indirect
npmpostcss8.5.25indirect
npmrimraf6.1.3indirect
npmrollup4.62.3indirect
npmsource-map-js1.2.1indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.17indirect
npmupdate-browserslist-db1.2.3indirect
npmvite7.3.6indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:sa11y@5.0.9 pulls in 3 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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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