Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 20:20 UTC

wuzenghai616-lang / goldbean

x402 Micropaid MCP Server — 51 Baidu AI tools for global developers. Pay-per-call with USDC, PayPal, or Alipay. No Chinese phone number needed.

JavaScript · HTMLMIT★ 1 star⑂ 7 forkssince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork serviceMCP serverCommand-line toolhow this is determined

wuzenghai616-lang/goldbean holds a health index of 33 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Vitality (56/100) and lowest on Security (21/100). It was last updated 45 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

33
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

33
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 38 is calibrated to 33 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

wuzenghai616-langPersonal account
2 followers25 public repossince Mar 2026

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?

56Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 45 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence1/52 weeks with commits
2.7/18Commit volume1 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained1 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year1
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push45
active_weeks_last_year1

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases3 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 63 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~1.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv1.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release63
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?

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
6.5/25Forks7 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
34.3/80Monthly downloads373 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgoldbean-mcp
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads373
unverified_packages_excluded
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?

32At Risk · 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
5.2/42Issue resolution12% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptance0/2 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues7
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.125
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
3.4/25Owner reach2 followers of wuzenghai616-lang
11.3/25Track record25 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginwuzenghai616-lang
public_repos25
account_age_days175
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 46 days ago
20/20Version history18 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgoldbean-mcp
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish46

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

41Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://goldbean-api.xyz
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics20 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmcp-server, x402, baidu-ai, ocr-api, tts-api, mcp, ai-agents, ai-gateway, api-marketplace, base-network, micropayments, usdc, ai-tools, alipay, api-gateway, claude-desktop, model-context-protocol, pay-per-use, paypal, usdc-on-base
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://goldbean-api.xyz
docs_sitehttps://goldbean-api.xyz
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

21At Risk · 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
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained1 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities41 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate1.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
6.4/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: underscore 1.4.4 (critical 9.8), socket.io 0.9.19 (high 7.3)
3.8/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories3 affected: uglify-js 1.2.5 (critical 9.8), xmlhttprequest 1.4.2 (critical 9.8), ws 0.4.32 (high)
19.1/40No advisories left outstanding5 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 3,246 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories9
affected_packages5
assessed_packages21
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 3, high 2
direct_affected_packages2
Matched the npm:monitor@0.6.10 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 21 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt present
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
52.2/55Manageable file sizes2/40 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes96,867
source_files_sampled40
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)public/docs/openapi.json, public/openapi.json
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_filespublic/docs/openapi.json, public/openapi.json
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

1GitHub stars
1contributors
1commits, last 12 months
45days since last push
3releases
1bus factor
7open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'goldbean' from its registry
  • npm package 'monitor' points at a different repository (https://github.com/lorenwest/node-monitor); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks
3Releases

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.

1234567712026-072026-082026-09
Major 1Minor 1Patch 1
OpenSSF Scorecard 1.9 / 10
1.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 20:20 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained1 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities41 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmexpress^5.2.1monitor/package.json
npmws^8.21.0monitor/package.json
npm@coinbase/cdp-sdk^1.50.0package.json
npm@x402/core^2.12.0package.json
npm@x402/evm^2.12.0package.json
npm@x402/express^2.12.0package.json
npmalipay-sdk^4.14.0package.json
npmaxios^1.16.1package.json
npmethers^6.16.0package.json
npmexpress^5.2.1package.json
npmhttp-proxy^1.18.1package.json
npmimap^0.8.19package.json
npmjsonwebtoken^9.0.3package.json
npmsocksv5^0.0.6package.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 5

Installing npm:monitor@0.6.10 pulls in 21 packages, direct and transitive: 5 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
underscore1.4.4directcritical21.13.8
uglify-js1.2.5indirectcritical22.7.2
xmlhttprequest1.4.2indirectcritical11.7.0
socket.io0.9.19directhigh24.6.2
ws0.4.32indirecthigh21.1.1

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 statisticsnpm.