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