Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 12:38 UTC

vantage-sh / vantage-go

Generated Go Client from Vantage's API Swagger file

Shell · MakefileMIT★ 2 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Aug 2023View on GitHub ↗

vantage-sh/vantage-go holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (87/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (27/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

60
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

VantageOrganization
132 followers34 public repossince May 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/vantage-sh/vantage-gov0.1.11-1061 day ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

87Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
15.2/36Commit cadence22/52 weeks with commits
16.6/18Commit volume69 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year69
human_commit_share0.79
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year22

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases91 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~21.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count91
latest_release_tagv0.1.11
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases21.6
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?

27At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars2 stars
2.5/25Forks3 forks
4.3/15Watchers7 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars2
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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

Sustainability & Governance

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

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 48% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth14 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled14
top_contributor_share0.485
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
20/30PR acceptance76/114 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 11/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs76
open_issues0
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs38
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
15.3/25Owner reach132 followers of vantage-sh
23.2/25Track record34 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers132
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginvantage-sh
public_repos34
account_age_days2,327

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history106 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/vantage-sh/vantage-go
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

30At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 11/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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
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
advisories11
affected_packages2
assessed_packages33
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitymoderate 1, unknown 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 33 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history64 of 79 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.81
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice13 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance9 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.13
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.09
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeShell without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/780 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageShell
largest_source_bytes33,135
source_files_sampled780
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)vantagev1/swagger.json, vantagev2/swagger.json
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesvantagev1/swagger.json, vantagev2/swagger.json
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

2GitHub stars
14contributors
69commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
91releases
2bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
82Releases

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.

12233312024-012025-032026-05
Major 0Minor 0Patch 82

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 12:37 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 11/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/errorsv0.22.7go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/runtimev0.26.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/strfmtv0.26.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swagv0.26.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/validatev0.25.2go.mod
All dependencies 33

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 28 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/errorsv0.22.7direct
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/runtimev0.26.0direct
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/strfmtv0.26.1direct
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swagv0.26.0direct
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/validatev0.25.2direct
Gogithub.com/go-logr/logrv1.2.3indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/stdrv1.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/analysisv0.24.3indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/jsonpointerv0.22.5indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/jsonreferencev0.21.5indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/loadsv0.23.3indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/specv0.22.4indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/cmdutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/convv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/fileutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/jsonnamev0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/jsonutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/loadingv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/manglingv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/netutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/stringutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/typeutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/yamlutilsv0.26.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-viper/mapstructure/v2v2.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/oklog/ulid/v2v2.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/opentracing/opentracing-gov1.2.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.14.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/tracev1.14.0indirect
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.50.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.34.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v2v2.4.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 33 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/netv0.50.0indirectmoderate101.27.0-rc.3
golang.org/x/textv0.34.0indirectunknown10.39.0

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.