0

/ 100

GradeF

Rough and inactive. Tests, CI, and a fuller README would revive it.

Higher than 42% of 5,156 graded repos

Fundamentals of Testing in JavaScript on TestingJavaScript.com

A low grade is a to-do list, not a judgment of your code

Most gaps here are documentation, tests, and setup, not the code itself. Closing your top 3 gaps alone would lift this repo to C (77).

See your top fixes
Now
F
58
Potential
C
77

Top fixes

Highest-impact changes first, ranked by point weight

19 to address
  1. 1
    CI/CD14pt

    If your CI lives elsewhere (a private repo that builds this one) or this project is itself a CI/CD tool, mark this check Not Applicable. Otherwise add a GitHub Actions workflow that runs tests on each push. It takes 15 minutes and reassures contributors their changes won't break things.

  2. 2
    README12pt

    Break it into sections (Overview, Install, Usage, Contributing) using Markdown headings.

  3. 3
    README12pt

    Show a quick-start snippet so contributors can see what using your project looks like.

  4. 4
    Install and run instructions9pt

    Add a .env.example listing all required environment variables so contributors know what to set up.

Working through the fixes? Let every push regrade itself.

The free GitHub App rescans this repo on every push and posts the grade as a commit check, so the score climbs without coming back to rescan by hand.

Install the GitHub App

Scorecard

Every check, grouped by category and sorted worst-first

Documentation

81

README12pt70

README is present.

Contributing guide5pt71

Contributing guide is too short for full depth credit (−6 pts). 400+ words earns the full +12 pts.

Add setup instructions, code style notes, and how to run tests.

Install and run instructions9pt90

README documents how to install the project.

License6pt100

Licensed under Other.

Engineering

45

CI/CD14pt0

No CI configuration detected in this repository.

If your CI lives elsewhere (a private repo that builds this one) or this project is itself a CI/CD tool, mark this check Not Applicable. Otherwise add a GitHub Actions workflow that runs tests on each push. It takes 15 minutes and reassures contributors their changes won't break things.

Linting and formatting5pt0

No linter or formatter found.

Add ESLint (eslint.config.js) and/or Prettier (.prettierrc), install them as devDependencies, and add a `lint` script to package.json.

Issue and PR templates6pt0

No issue or PR templates found (−100 pts).

Add .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ with bug_report.md and feature_request.md to guide contributors. It dramatically improves issue quality.

Reproducibility6pt70

Lockfile present (package-lock.json). Installs are reproducible.

Tests18pt100

Test files detected (lessons/jest.test.js).

Project health

53

Activity5pt5

No pushes in over 2 years. Looks unmaintained (−95 pts).

A recent commit signals the project is alive and worth using.

Repository metadata5pt60

Repository has a description.

Dependency manifest6pt65

Dependency manifest found (package.json).

Housekeeping3pt100

.gitignore present.

Repository health signals

Activity, community, and responsiveness at scan time

Activity

  • -
    Commits (30d / 90d)
  • 0
    Forks
  • 0
    Releases

Community

  • -
    Community health
  • -
    authors own >50% of commits
  • 0
    Watchers

Responsiveness

  • -
    Median issue response
  • -
    Median PR merge time
  • 0
    Open issues
Repository files11 root entries
  • lessons
    Good: Test files detected (lessons/jest.test.js).
  • .all-contributorsrc
  • .gitignore
    Good: .gitignore present.
  • CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
    Good: Code of conduct present.
  • CONTRIBUTING.md
    Issue: Contributing guide is too short for full depth credit (−6 pts). 400+ words earns the full +12 pts.Fix: Add setup instructions, code style notes, and how to run tests.
    Issue: Contributing guide lacks a setup section (−12 pts).Fix: Show new contributors how to get a local dev environment running.
    Issue: Contributing guide lacks a code style section (−8 pts).Fix: Describe your linting/formatting rules and how to run them.
    Issue: Contributing guide lacks a testing section (−8 pts).Fix: Show contributors how to run the test suite (e.g. npm test, pytest, cargo test).
    Good: Contributing guide describes the PR/review workflow.
    Good: Contributing guide includes code examples.
  • LICENSE.md
    Good: Licensed under Other.
  • math.js
  • package-lock.json
    Good: Lockfile present (package-lock.json). Installs are reproducible.
  • package.json
    Good: Dependency manifest found (package.json).
  • README.md
    Good: README is present.
    Issue: README has little structure (−15 pts). Add 2-3 headings for +8 pts; 4+ earns +15 pts.Fix: Break it into sections (Overview, Install, Usage, Contributing) using Markdown headings.
    Good: README includes screenshots or visuals. Great for first impressions.
    Issue: README has no code examples (−15 pts).Fix: Show a quick-start snippet so contributors can see what using your project looks like.
    Good: README links to a live demo or deployed app.
    Good: README includes status badges.
    Good: README documents how to install the project.
    Good: README documents how to run the project.
  • setup-globals.js
RepoGrade badge preview

Add this badge to your README

It updates automatically each time the repo is re-graded.

[![RepoGrade](https://www.repo-grade.com/api/badge/hrobarikt/js-testing-fundamentals)](https://www.repo-grade.com/report/hrobarikt/js-testing-fundamentals)

More graded repos