0

/ 100

GradeD

Popular for its size, but the engineering basics lag behind the interest.

Higher than 45% of 5,156 graded repos

Talk to one agent. Ship with a crew.

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 (75).

See your top fixes
Now
D
61
Potential
C
75

Top fixes

Highest-impact changes first, ranked by point weight

19 to address
  1. 1
    Tests18pt

    Wire your tests to a documented command (e.g. a test script in your build config) so the suite is reproducible.

  2. 2
    CI/CD14pt

    Add a step like `run: npm test`, `run: pytest`, or `run: tox` to your workflow file.

  3. 3
    CI/CD14pt

    Add a lint step to catch style issues automatically.

  4. 4
    CI/CD14pt

    Add `tsc --noEmit`, `mypy`, or `cargo check` to catch type errors before they merge.

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

79

Install and run instructions9pt45

README documents how to install the project.

Contributing guide5pt66

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.

README12pt100

README is present.

License6pt100

Licensed under MIT.

Engineering

46

Linting and formatting5pt0

No linter or formatter config found.

→ Add a linter config such as .eslintrc.json, .prettierrc, ruff.toml, or .golangci.yml to enforce consistent code style.

Reproducibility6pt0

No dependency lockfile found (−70 pts).

→ Commit the lockfile for this project's package manager so installs produce the same dependency versions everywhere.

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.

CI/CD14pt57

CI is configured (.github/workflows/ci.yml).

Tests18pt80

Test files detected (tests).

Project health

68

Dependency manifest6pt0

No dependency manifest detected at root.

→ Add a manifest (package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod, etc.) so others can install dependencies in one command.

Repository metadata5pt100

Repository has a description.

Activity5pt100

Actively maintained (pushed within the last month).

Housekeeping3pt100

.gitignore present.

Repository health signals

Activity, community, and responsiveness at scan time

Activity

  • -
    Commits (30d / 90d)
  • 21
    Forks
  • 0
    Releases

Community

  • -
    Community health
  • -
    authors own >50% of commits
  • 137
    Watchers

Responsiveness

  • <1h
    Median issue response
  • <1h
    Median PR merge time
  • 4
    Open issues
Repository files13 root entries
  • .agents
  • .claude
  • .github
    Good: CI is configured (.github/workflows/ci.yml).
  • assets
  • bin
  • tests
    Good: Test files detected (tests).
  • .gitignore
    Good: .gitignore present.
  • .no-mistakes.yaml
  • AGENTS.md
  • CLAUDE.md
  • 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
    Good: Licensed under MIT.
  • README.md
    Good: README is present.
    Good: README is well structured with multiple sections.
    Good: README includes screenshots or visuals. Great for first impressions.
    Good: README has code examples.
    Good: README links to a live demo or deployed app.
    Good: README includes status badges.
    Good: README documents how to install the project.
    Issue: No run or usage instructions found (−45 pts).Fix: Add a section showing how to start or use the project.
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/kunchenguid/firstmate)](https://www.repo-grade.com/report/kunchenguid/firstmate)

More graded Shell repos