Getting noticed, but rough fundamentals could turn visitors away.
A curated list of my GitHub stars!
Documentation
57
No license detected.
→ Add a LICENSE file. Without one, nobody can legally use, copy, or contribute to your code.
No CONTRIBUTING.md found (−47 pts base + up to −53 pts more for content).
→ Add a CONTRIBUTING.md telling newcomers how to get involved. Include setup, code style, test, and PR instructions.
README is present.
README documents how to install the project.
Engineering
13
No tests detected anywhere in the repository.
→ Add automated tests. They prove the code works and give contributors confidence to make changes.
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.
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.
No dependency lockfile found (−70 pts).
→ Commit the lockfile for this project's package manager so installs produce the same dependency versions everywhere.
CI is configured (.github/workflows/starred.yml).
Project health
48
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.
No .gitignore found (−60 pts).
→ Add a .gitignore to keep build output, node_modules, and secrets out of version control.
Repository has a description.
Actively maintained (pushed within the last month).
Repository health signals
Activity, community, and responsiveness at scan time
Activity
- —Commits (30d / 90d)
- 19Forks
- 0Releases
Community
- —Community health
- —authors own >50% of commits
- 211Watchers
Responsiveness
- —Median issue response
- 12d 14hMedian PR merge time
- 2Open issues
Repository files2 root entries
- .githubGood: CI is configured (.github/workflows/starred.yml).Good: Dependabot configured for github-actions.
- README.mdGood: README is present.Good: README is well structured with multiple sections.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.