Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 13:34 UTC

thedavidweng / canvas-cli

Agent-friendly CLI for Canvas LMS. Stable JSON output, automatic pagination, mutation safety gates, audit logging.

GoApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

thedavidweng/canvas-cli holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (100/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (36/100). It was last updated 9 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

DavyPersonal account
37 followers133 public repossince Nov 2021

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/thedavidweng/canvas-cliv0.4.0-454 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 9 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
17.6/18Commit volume90 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained29 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year90
human_commit_share0.967
days_since_last_push9
active_weeks_last_year10

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases3 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 54 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~21.2 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv0.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release54
mean_days_between_releases21.2

Community & Adoption

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

36Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

49Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution50% of issues closed
27/30PR acceptance18/20 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs18
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
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
11.4/25Owner reach37 followers of thedavidweng
22.6/25Track record133 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers37
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginthedavidweng
public_repos133
account_age_days1,754
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 54 days ago
12/20Version history4 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/thedavidweng/canvas-cli
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish54

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests12 out of 12 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://thedavidweng.github.io/site/canvas-cli/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent-friendly, api-client, canvas-lms, cli, education, go, json, lms
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://thedavidweng.github.io/site/canvas-cli/
docs_sitehttps://thedavidweng.github.io/site/canvas-cli/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

76Good · 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-Tests12 out of 12 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 0/26 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
7.5/7.5Maintained29 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-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_aggregate7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages13
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 1
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 13 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

100Exceptional · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://thedavidweng.github.io/site/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history82 of 87 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://thedavidweng.github.io/site/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.943
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes1,430
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapmise.toml
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.golangci.yml
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice8 of the last 90 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance3 of the last 90 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesmise.toml
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.089
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.033
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
54.6/55Manageable file sizes1/126 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes80,047
source_files_sampled126
oversized_source_files1
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

0GitHub stars
1contributors
90commits, last 12 months
9days since last push
3releases
1bus factor
1open 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 · 2026-09-18 13:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests12 out of 12 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 0/26 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
10Maintained29 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/browserutils/kookyv0.2.10go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
All dependencies 13

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 9 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/browserutils/kookyv0.2.10direct
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1direct
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/pierrec/lz4/v4v4.1.29indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10indirect
Gogithub.com/zalando/go-keyringv0.2.8indirect
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.56.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.58.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.41.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/ini.v1v1.67.3indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 13 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/cryptov0.56.0indirectunknown1

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 statisticsGo.