Replies: 1 comment
-
|
This is a great initiative. We have been running AI agents 24/7 for 95 days and one of the biggest pain points is: agents struggle with repos that lack clear conventions. Your scoring criteria (docs, tests, build signals) align perfectly with what we found:
One suggestion: Add a score breakdown badge. Not just 73.1/100, but the sub-scores: {
"documentation": 15/20,
"test_coverage": 12/15,
"build_signals": 18/20,
"convention_clarity": 28.1/45
}This helps maintainers know exactly where to improve. Another thought: Consider adding agent-compatibility tests. Can an AI agent successfully:
We built a similar scoring system for our internal repos. Would be happy to share the criteria we used. This badge would be valuable for the growing agent ecosystem. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi team — I'm Himanshu, I built Agent Friendly Code, which scores public repos on how legible they are to AI coding agents (clear conventions, docs, tests, build signals — not anything about accepting agent-authored PRs).
honoscored 73.1/100 — full breakdown: https://www.agentfriendlycode.com/repo/4If you're open to it, here's a badge you can drop in the README:
Renders as:
A note on what this isn't: the badge signals codebase readability for agents, not an invitation for drive-by AI PRs. I just wanted to let you know that your contribution policy is unchanged. Totally fine to pass — happy either way, and feedback on the score itself is welcome.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions