Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-01 18:41 UTC

zerkerlabs / treeship

Portable trust receipts for agent workflows. Signed, chained, verifiable.

RustApache-2.0★ 13 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolTerminal interfaceMCP serverhow this is determined

zerkerlabs/treeship holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (92/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (43/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

zerker labsOrganization
8 followers5 public repossince Nov 2024

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
18.7/36Commit cadence — 27/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 806 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year806
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year27
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 70 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count70
latest_release_tagv0.31.13
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases2.2

Community & Adoption

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

57Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
17.5/60Stars — 13 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars13
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_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
53.5/80Monthly downloads — 10,214 downloads/month across crates, go, npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/zerkerlabs/treeship, treeship-cli, rig-treeship, @treeship/a2a, @treeship/mcp, treeship-core, treeship, @treeship/sdk
dependents—
ecosystemscrates, go, npm
total_downloads1,676
monthly_downloads10,214
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?

43Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.994
How it's scored
6/42Issue resolution — 14% of issues closed
28.4/30PR acceptance — 521/551 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs521
open_issues6
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d37
prs_decided_7d37
prs_merged_30d43
prs_decided_30d43
issue_closed_ratio0.143
closed_unmerged_prs30
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
6.9/25Owner reach — 8 followers of zerkerlabs
9.5/25Track record — 5 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers8
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginzerkerlabs
public_repos5
account_age_days693
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 8 package(s) on crates, go, npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 70 published versions
0/20Not deprecated — treeship-cli: deprecated/yanked on the registry
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/zerkerlabs/treeship, treeship-cli, rig-treeship, @treeship/a2a, @treeship/mcp, treeship-core, treeship, @treeship/sdk
ecosystemscrates, go, npm
any_deprecatedyes
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rustfmt.toml, Cargo.toml ([workspace.lints]), clippy.toml, packages/cli/Cargo.toml ([lints]), packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml ([lints]), packages/core/Cargo.toml ([lints]), packages/rig/Cargo.toml ([lints])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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 site — https://treeship.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 14 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagents, ai, attestation, audit-trail, cryptography, ed25519, verification, mcp, merkle-tree, open-source, receipts, rust, trust, treeship
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://treeship.dev
docs_sitehttps://treeship.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
2.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 59 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages4
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:treeship@0.31.12 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 4 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.

92Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, integrations/claude-code/CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://treeship.dev/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 100 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://treeship.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, integrations/claude-code/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes28,083
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, packages/cli/Cargo.toml, packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rustfmt.toml, Cargo.toml ([workspace.lints]), clippy.toml, packages/cli/Cargo.toml ([lints]), packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml ([lints]), packages/core/Cargo.toml ([lints]), packages/rig/Cargo.toml ([lints])
11/11Static type checking — bridges/a2a/tsconfig.json, bridges/mcp/tsconfig.json, docs/tsconfig.json, integrations/openclaw-plugin/tsconfig.json, packages/sdk-ts/tsconfig.json, packages/verify-js/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 99 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock, go.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsbridges/a2a/tsconfig.json, bridges/mcp/tsconfig.json, docs/tsconfig.json, integrations/openclaw-plugin/tsconfig.json, packages/sdk-ts/tsconfig.json, packages/verify-js/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.99
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, packages/cli/Cargo.toml, packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml, packages/core/Cargo.toml, packages/hub/go.mod, packages/rig/Cargo.toml, packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml, packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml, packages/zk-risc0/methods/Cargo.toml, packages/zk-risc0/methods/guest/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
53.4/55Manageable file sizes — 13/447 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes201,620
source_files_sampled447
oversized_source_files13
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

13GitHub stars
4contributors
806commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
70releases
1bus factor
6open issues
crates.io, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
38Releases

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.

12233312026-032026-052026-07
Major 0Minor 16Patch 22
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-10-01 18:41 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities59 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 79
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@treeship/core-wasm0.31.13bridges/a2a/package.json
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk^1.29.0bridges/mcp/package.json
npm@treeship/core-wasm0.31.13bridges/mcp/package.json
npmzod^3.25.76bridges/mcp/package.json
PyPItreeship-sdk>=0.29.0integrations/commerce-agents/pyproject.toml
crates.iotreeship-core0.31.13packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioed25519-dalek2packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.8packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iohome0.5packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.22packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iofs20.4packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioureq2packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iourl2packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.10packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iotreeship-zk-circom0.5.0packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iotreeship-zk-risc00.5.0packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_yaml0.9packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iotempfile3packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioratatui0.28packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iocrossterm0.28packages/cli/Cargo.toml
crates.iotreeship-core—packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde-wasm-bindgen0.6packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iojs-sys0.3packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioed25519-dalek2packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.22packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iogetrandom0.2packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioark-groth160.4packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioark-bn2540.4packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioark-serialize0.4packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioark-ec0.4packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioark-ff0.4packages/core-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioed25519-dalek2packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.10packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.22packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.8packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_yaml0.9packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.ioaes-gcm0.10packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.iozeroize1packages/core/Cargo.toml
crates.iop2560.13packages/core/Cargo.toml
Gogithub.com/go-chi/chi/v5v5.0.12packages/hub/go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-chi/httpratev0.16.0packages/hub/go.mod
Gomodernc.org/sqlitev1.29.5packages/hub/go.mod
crates.iorig0.41packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.iotreeship-core0.31.13packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.10packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror2packages/rig/Cargo.toml
crates.ioed25519-dalek2packages/rig/Cargo.toml
npm@treeship/core-wasm0.31.13packages/sdk-ts/package.json
npm@treeship/core-wasm0.31.13packages/verify-js/package.json
crates.ioserde1packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.10packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror1packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.ionum-bigint0.4packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.8packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
crates.iotempfile3packages/zk-circom/Cargo.toml
npmcircomlib^2.0.5packages/zk-circom/package.json
crates.ioserde1packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.10packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.22packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.iotreeship-zk-risc0-methods—packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.iorisc0-zkvm^3.0.5packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
crates.iobincode1packages/zk-risc0/Cargo.toml
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 0

Installing npm:treeship@0.31.12 pulls in 4 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 — Go, crates.io, npm.