Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-05 13:02 UTC

schmooky / pylinka

TypeScriptMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryWeb interfacehow this is determined

schmooky/pylinka holds a health index of 11 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (75/100) and lowest on Security (24/100). It was last updated 11 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

11
overall / 100
Critical

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.

11
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). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 20% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

Dmitry VasilievPersonal account
25 followers48 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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

68Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 11 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
15.3/18Commit volume — 49 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year49
human_commit_share0.898
days_since_last_push11
active_weeks_last_year2

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 21 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 11 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tag@pylinka/core@1.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release11
mean_days_between_releases1.2
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?

36Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars3
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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
52.6/80Monthly downloads — 8,841 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@pylinka/core, @pylinka/graph, @pylinka/format, @pylinka/compiler
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads8,841
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 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
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 17/17 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 12/12 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs17
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d12
prs_decided_30d12
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d12
first_time_prs_decided_30d12
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
10.2/25Owner reach — 25 followers of schmooky
24.3/25Track record — 48 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers25
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginschmooky
public_repos48
account_age_days2,999
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 4 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 11 days ago
20/20Version history — 23 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@pylinka/core, @pylinka/graph, @pylinka/format, @pylinka/compiler
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish11

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

75Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 15 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

24At Risk · 16% of overall
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
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 15 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packaging — no data
2.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 25 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate2.7
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier20
security_posture_after_multiplier5
security_posture_before_jurisdiction27
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): packaging, signed_releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 20% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages2
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:@pylinka/core@1.1.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 2 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 44 of 44 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.js
11/11Static type checking — apps/mobile-preview/tsconfig.json, apps/site/tsconfig.json, examples/announcer/tsconfig.json, examples/assetpack/tsconfig.json, examples/containers/tsconfig.json, examples/interaction-lab/tsconfig.json, examples/plain-assets/tsconfig.json, packages/compiler/tsconfig.json, packages/core/tsconfig.json, packages/format/tsconfig.json, packages/graph/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 41 of the last 49 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsapps/mobile-preview/tsconfig.json, apps/site/tsconfig.json, examples/announcer/tsconfig.json, examples/assetpack/tsconfig.json, examples/containers/tsconfig.json, examples/interaction-lab/tsconfig.json, examples/plain-assets/tsconfig.json, packages/compiler/tsconfig.json, packages/core/tsconfig.json, packages/format/tsconfig.json, packages/graph/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.837
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/129 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes58,454
source_files_sampled129
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples, recipes
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, recipes
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files

Key facts

3GitHub stars
1contributors
49commits, last 12 months
11days since last push
21releases
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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.7 / 10
2.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-05 13:02 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests15 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/25 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
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
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
0Vulnerabilities25 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 16
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@pylinka/coreworkspace:*apps/mobile-preview/package.json
npm@pylinka/graphworkspace:*apps/mobile-preview/package.json
npm@astrojs/sitemap^3.2.1apps/site/package.json
npm@pylinka/compilerworkspace:*apps/site/package.json
npm@pylinka/coreworkspace:*apps/site/package.json
npm@pylinka/graphworkspace:*apps/site/package.json
npm@xyflow/react^12.3.0apps/site/package.json
npmreact^19.0.0apps/site/package.json
npmreact-dom^19.0.0apps/site/package.json
npmzustand^5.0.0apps/site/package.json
npm@pylinka/graphworkspace:*packages/compiler/package.json
npm@pylinka/compilerworkspace:*packages/core/package.json
npm@pylinka/graphworkspace:*packages/core/package.json
npm@pylinka/graphworkspace:*packages/format/package.json
npmsharp^0.34.5tools/atlas-extract/package.json
npmplaywright^1.61.0tools/gen-previews/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

Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:@pylinka/core@1.1.0 pulls in 2 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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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