Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 00:40 UTC

stellar-optics / stellar-xdr-lens

GoApache-2.0★ 6 stars⑂ 24 forkssince Aug 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

stellar-optics/stellar-xdr-lens holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (76/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (55/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account 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

stellar-opticsOrganization
3 followers5 public repossince Aug 2026

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/stellar-optics/stellar-xdr-lensv0.2.0-274 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 146 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_year146
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 2 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 74 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tagv0.2.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release74
mean_days_between_releases1
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?

55Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
11.3/60Stars — 6 stars
11.3/25Forks — 24 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks24
stars6
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, goreportcard.com, pkg.go.dev, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 50% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 21 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled21
top_contributor_share0.497
How it's scored
22.2/42Issue resolution — 53% of issues closed
27.6/30PR acceptance — 34/37 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 12/12 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs34
open_issues66
closed_issues74
prs_merged_7d31
prs_decided_7d32
prs_merged_30d31
prs_decided_30d32
issue_closed_ratio0.529
closed_unmerged_prs3
first_time_authors_30d12
first_time_prs_merged_30d12
first_time_prs_decided_30d12
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
4.3/25Owner reach — 3 followers of stellar-optics
6.1/25Track record — 5 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers3
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginstellar-optics
public_repos5
account_age_days75
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 74 days ago
12/20Version history — 2 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/stellar-optics/stellar-xdr-lens
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish74

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgolang, soroban, stellar, xdr
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

67Good · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is 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
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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.

75Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://developers.stellar.org/llms.txt)
39.5/40Legible commit history — 74 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://developers.stellar.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.74
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/184 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes34,244
source_files_sampled184
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

6GitHub stars
21contributors
146commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
2releases
2bus factor
66open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • First-time contributor figures cover 12 of 21 authors (cap 12)
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 24 ⇿
0Stars
24Forks

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.

48121620242492026-102026-102026-10
OpenSSF Scorecard 6.7 / 10
6.7aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 00:40 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
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
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/stellar/go-stellar-sdkv0.7.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/stellar/go-xdrv0.0.0-20260806060815-dc590f17552ago.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — Go.