Leaderboard github.com
ngutman/tmux-agents-sidebar
AI provenance
0%
possible
- Confidence
- 44%
- Coverage
- 100%
Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.
Code quality
73/100
adequate
- Confidence
- 90%
- Coverage
- 100%
Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.
Security
77/100
adequate
- Confidence
- 85%
- Coverage
- 100%
Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.
AI provenance
0% possible
Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development.
How the score is built
- Explicitly attributed share0%
- Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
- Estimated AI-generated share0%
- AI tool configuration files1
- Work sessions at AI pace0
- Releases at AI pacenot measured
- Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00
Lines added per month all AI-attributed share
- 2026-042,149 · 0% AI
Evidence by analyzer
Explicit AI attributionok
- attributed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- attributed_commits
- 0
- attributed_loc
- 0
- attributed_loc_share
- 0.0%
- commits
- 16
- effective_loc
- 2,149
- tools_detected
- 0
AI tool configurationok1 item
- artifacts
- 1
- earliest_adoption
- 2026-04-07
- tools_configured
- 1
- workflow_agents
- 0
Commit velocityok
- excluded_import_loc
- 0
- flagged_loc
- 0
- flagged_loc_share
- 0.0%
- flagged_units
- 0
- max_loc_per_hour
- 302
- measured_loc
- 2,149
- median_loc_per_hour
- 99.21
- pr_timed_units
- 0
- pre_ai_era_burst_loc
- 0
- pre_ai_era_bursts
- 0
- pre_ai_era_measured_loc
- 0
- work_units
- 6
Release velocityskipped
Coding styleok
- count:assistant_voice
- 0
- count:emoji_in_code
- 0
- count:narrated_steps
- 0
- count:placeholder
- 0
- files:assistant_voice
- 0
- files:emoji_in_code
- 0
- files:narrated_steps
- 0
- files:placeholder
- 0
- index
- 0
- lines_scanned
- 855
- per_kloc:assistant_voice
- 0
- per_kloc:emoji_in_code
- 0
- per_kloc:narrated_steps
- 0
- per_kloc:placeholder
- 0
Code quality
73 adequate
Code quality is adequate: test-to-source ratio 1.43, no CI test run detected; 23% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: type safety.
How the score is built
- Complexity50
- Duplication100
- Lint and smells100
- Tests and CI55
- Documentation100
- Type safety40
- Review processnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
Complexity (lizard)ok3 items
- fetch_snapshot in scripts/agents-sidebar.py: complexity 26, 61 lines
- handle_key in scripts/agents-sidebar.py: complexity 22, 51 lines
- entry_row in scripts/agents-sidebar.py: complexity 17, 47 lines
- complex_functions
- 3
- function_nloc
- 691
- functions
- 62
- long_functions
- 0
- many_param_functions
- 0
- mean_ccn
- 4.56
- p90_ccn
- 9
- risky_nloc_share
- 23.0%
Duplication (jscpd)ok
- compared_lines
- 691
- duplicated_lines
- 0
- duplicated_share
- 0.0%
- files
- 2
Lintok
- findings
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 855
- weighted_findings
- 0
Tests and CIok
- check:ci_present
- no
- check:ci_runs_lint
- no
- check:ci_runs_tests
- no
- check:has_tests
- yes
- check:test_ratio
- yes
- check:tests_cochange
- yes
- ci_files
- 0
- cochange_commits
- 4
- cochange_share
- 75.0%
- source_lines
- 855
- test_lines
- 1,226
- test_ratio
- 1.43
Documentationok4 items
- README.md
README.md - LICENSE.md
LICENSE.md - CONTRIBUTING.md
CONTRIBUTING.md - CHANGELOG.md
CHANGELOG.md
- check:changelog
- yes
- check:contributing
- yes
- check:license
- yes
- check:readme
- yes
- readme_lines
- 143
Type safetyok
- check:low_escape_density
- yes
- check:strict_config
- no
- escapes
- 0
- escapes_per_kloc
- 0
Security
77 adequate
Security posture is adequate: 1 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.
How the score is built
- Secrets100
- Static analysis (SAST)77
- Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
- CI workflowsnot measured
- Security posture20
- OpenSSF Scorecardnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
OpenSSF Scorecardskipped
no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo
Package registriesskipped
no registry dependencies declared
Secrets (gitleaks)ok
- secrets_current
- 0
- secrets_history
- 0
- secrets_low_confidence
- 0
- secrets_nonprod
- 0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
- findings
- 1
- findings_high
- 1
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 0
- parse_errors
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 855
- weighted_findings
- 0.75
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)skipped
Security postureok
- check:dependency_updates
- no
- check:lockfiles
- yes
- check:security_policy
- no
- check:signed_commits
- yes
- signed_commit_share
- 68.8%
- unpinned_manifests
- 0
Release downloadsok
- binary_assets
- 0
- signals
- 0
- suspicious
- 0
Findings
1 high
| Severity | Rule | Location | Message | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit |
scripts/agents-sidebar.py:103 | Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
Tools and coverage
Every analyzer that ran on this commit. A failed or skipped tool is a coverage gap: its share of the score is left out and the coverage figure drops.
| Analyzer | Pillar | Status | Version | Findings | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI tool configuration | AI provenance | ok | signatures-v1 | 0 | |
| Explicit AI attribution | AI provenance | ok | signatures-v1 | 0 | |
| Release velocity | AI provenance | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Coding style | AI provenance | ok | — | 0 | |
| Commit velocity | AI provenance | ok | prov-4 | 0 | |
| Complexity (lizard) | Code quality | ok | lizard 1.25.1 | 0 | |
| Documentation | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Duplication (jscpd) | Code quality | ok | repotrust-dup-w6 | 0 | |
| Lint | Code quality | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 0 | |
| Tests and CI | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Type safety | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | Security | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Dependencies (osv-scanner) | Security | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Release downloads | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Security posture | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Package registries | Security | skipped | — | 0 | no registry dependencies declared |
| Static analysis (opengrep) | Security | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 1 | |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | Security | skipped | — | 0 | no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo |
| Secrets (gitleaks) | Security | ok | gitleaks 8.30.1 | 0 |
Score history
Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.
| Scored | Commit | Scoring | AI provenance | Quality | Security |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-11-14 | e91b5dc6feb8 | prov-5+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 73 | 77 |
| 2026-11-14 | e91b5dc6feb8 | prov-4+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 73 | 77 |
Full text report
- Repository: https://github.com/ngutman/tmux-agents-sidebar
- Commit:
e91b5dc6feb8b829a747213bb389d51211b3485c - Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:06+00:00
- Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2
Scores
| Pillar | Score | Signal | Confidence | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) | 0 | possible | 44% | 100% |
| Code quality | 73 | adequate | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 77 | adequate | 85% | 100% |
AI provenance
Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development.
-
Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
-
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
-
Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
-
AI tooling configured in repo: generic-agent
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-04 | 2,149 | 0% |
Evidence
- AGENTS.md (generic-agent configuration) (AGENTS.md)
AI provenance describes how code was produced; it is not a quality judgment. Unless attribution is explicit, these are signals consistent with AI generation, not proof. Squash/rebase workflows, imported code, and rewritten history reduce accuracy.
Code quality
Code quality is adequate: test-to-source ratio 1.43, no CI test run detected; 23% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: type safety.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 50 |
| Duplication | 100 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 100 |
| Tests and CI | 55 |
| Documentation | 100 |
| Type safety | 40 |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | n/a |
- Functions: 62; mean complexity 4.6, 90th percentile 9; 3 complex and 0 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 0.0% of 691 compared
- Tests: 1,226 test lines for 855 source lines (ratio 1.43); CI test commands: none detected; 75% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: none
Most complex functions:
- fetch_snapshot in scripts/agents-sidebar.py: complexity 26, 61 lines
- handle_key in scripts/agents-sidebar.py: complexity 22, 51 lines
- entry_row in scripts/agents-sidebar.py: complexity 17, 47 lines
Security
Security posture is adequate: 1 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 100 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 77 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | n/a |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | n/a |
| Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) | 20 |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | n/a |
- Posture checks passed: signed commits, lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates
Top findings
| Severity | Finding | Location |
|---|---|---|
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low] |
scripts/agents-sidebar.py:103 |
Static signals only: the scorer never runs the project's code. Secret findings are pattern matches that were not verified, and secret values are never stored.
Repository profile
- Source lines: 855; test lines: 1,226
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| Shell | 1,226 |
| Python | 682 |
| TypeScript | 173 |