Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-09 14:20 UTC

sheepzh / time-tracker-4-browser

A browser extension that helps you track time, analyze your habits and block addictive sites

TypeScriptMIT★ 983 stars⑂ 79 forkssince Mar 2021View on GitHub ↗
KindBrowser extensionWeb interfacehow this is determined

sheepzh/time-tracker-4-browser holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (84/100) and lowest on Security (40/100). 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

sheepiePersonal account
103 followers46 public repossince May 2016Alibaba

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
npmtt4bpoints to another repo — not scored0.0.1-security51597 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
36/36Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 393 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year393
human_commit_share0.77
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 32 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 690 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~96.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count32
latest_release_tagv2.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release690
mean_days_between_releases96.1

Community & Adoption

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

68Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.5/60Stars — 983 stars
15.8/25Forks — 79 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks79
stars983
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges12
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 13 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled13
top_contributor_share0.98
How it's scored
41.3/42Issue resolution — 98% of issues closed
22/30PR acceptance — 312/425 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs312
open_issues8
closed_issues454
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d11
prs_decided_30d14
issue_closed_ratio0.983
closed_unmerged_prs113
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
14.5/25Owner reach — 103 followers of sheepzh
24.2/25Track record — 46 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers103
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginsheepzh
public_repos46
account_age_days3,766
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 11 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://time-tracker-4-browser.app/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsedge-extension, time-tracking, chrome-extension, firefox-addon, time-tracker
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://time-tracker-4-browser.app/
docs_sitehttps://time-tracker-4-browser.app/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

40Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestsexamples/package.json, package.json
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages4
unassessed_packages37
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 4 resolved dependencies against OSV. 37 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

70Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
18/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md, .github/instructions/code-review.md (stub)
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://time-tracker-4-browser.app/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 65 of 77 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://time-tracker-4-browser.app/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.844
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, .github/instructions/code-review.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes100
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/668 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes36,763
source_files_sampled668
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
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

983GitHub stars
13contributors
393commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
32releases
1bus factor
8open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • npm package 'tt4b' points at a different repository (npm/security-holder); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code 0; Skipping github.com/sheepzh/time-tracker-4-browser: run: internal error: ListCommits:error during graphqlHandler.setup: internal error: githubv4.Query: Something went wrong while executing your query on 2026-09-09T14:20:09Z. Please include `873C:D5FF7:1769932:16AEDB3:6AA16B16` when reporting this issue.); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 79 ⇿
0Stars
79Forks
14Releases

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.

0204060807832021-102024-032026-08
Major 1Minor 13Patch 0

Each point covers 5 days.

Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@element-plus/icons-vue^2.3.2package.json
npm@emotion/css^11.13.5package.json
npmecharts^6.1.0package.json
npmelement-plus2.14.5package.json
npmqrcode-generator^2.0.4package.json
npmtypescript-guard0.2.6package.json
npmvue^3.5.42package.json
npmvue-router^5.3.0package.json
All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 33 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@element-plus/icons-vue^2.3.2direct
npm@emotion/css^11.13.5direct
npmecharts^6.1.0direct
npmelement-plus2.14.5direct
npmqrcode-generator^2.0.4direct
npmtypescript-guard0.2.6direct
npmvue^3.5.42direct
npmvue-router^5.3.0direct
npm@commitlint/types^21.2.0indirect
npm@crowdin/crowdin-api-client^1.56.4indirect
npm@emotion/babel-plugin^11.13.5indirect
npm@rsdoctor/rspack-plugin^1.6.3indirect
npm@rspack/cli^2.2.1indirect
npm@rspack/core^2.2.1indirect
npm@rstest/core^0.11.10indirect
npm@rstest/coverage-istanbul^0.11.10indirect
npm@types/chrome0.2.7indirect
npm@types/decompress^4.2.7indirect
npm@types/firefox-webext-browser^143.0.0indirect
npm@types/node^26.1.1indirect
npm@types/node^26.4.0indirect
npm@vue/babel-plugin-jsx^3.0.0indirect
npmbabel-loader^10.1.1indirect
npmcommitlint^21.2.2indirect
npmcss-loader^7.1.5indirect
npmdecompress^4.2.1indirect
npmfake-indexeddb^6.2.5indirect
npmhash.js^1.1.7indirect
npmhusky^9.1.7indirect
npmjsdom^30.0.1indirect
npmjszip^3.10.1indirect
npmknip^6.33.0indirect
npmpostcss^8.5.26indirect
npmpostcss-loader^8.2.1indirect
npmpostcss-rtlcss^6.0.0indirect
npmpuppeteer^25.9.0indirect
npmts-checker-rspack-plugin^1.6.1indirect
npmtsx^4.23.0indirect
npmtsx^4.23.13indirect
npmtypescript7.0.2indirect
npmunplugin-element-plus^0.11.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 4 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 37 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 statistics — npm.