Repo Analyzer

GitHub repository trust scoring and due diligence. Use when asked to analyze, audit, score, or evaluate any GitHub repo — especially for crypto/DeFi project DD, checking if a repo is legit, evaluating code quality, verifying team credibility, or comparing multiple repos. Also handles X/Twitter URLs containing GitHub links — auto-extracts and analyzes repos from tweets. Triggers on "analyze this repo", "is this legit", "check this GitHub", "trust score", "audit this project", "repo quality", "batch scan repos", "analyze this tweet". ALSO auto-triggers when the user pastes an X/Twitter URL that contains a GitHub link — no explicit "analyze" command needed. When triggered by a tweet, ALWAYS include the tweet text/context above the analysis. Do NOT use for general GitHub browsing, reading READMEs, or cloning repos without analysis.

Audits

Malicious

ClawScanReview

Agentic behavior and permission review.

Static analysisMalicious

Pattern checks against bundled files.

VirusTotalPass

Multi-engine malware detections and file reputation.

Install

openclaw skills install repo-analyzer

Repo Analyzer

Zero-dependency GitHub trust scorer. Runs 29 analysis modules across 12 scoring categories.

Usage

# Single repo
node scripts/analyze.js <owner/repo or github-url> [flags]

# From a tweet (auto-extracts GitHub links)
node scripts/analyze.js <x.com-or-twitter.com-url> [flags]

# Batch mode
node scripts/analyze.js --file <repos.txt> [--json]

Flags

--json — JSON output (for pipelines)
--oneline — compact one-line score
--badge — shields.io markdown badge
--verbose — show progress
--token <pat> — GitHub PAT (or set GITHUB_TOKEN env)
--file <path> — batch mode, one repo per line (# comments ok)

Environment

CRITICAL: Always run with GITHUB_TOKEN loaded. Without it, scores are severely degraded (missing stars, forks, commits). Before running: source ~/.bashrc (token is in ~/.bashrc as GITHUB_TOKEN). Or pass explicitly: GITHUB_TOKEN="$(grep GITHUB_TOKEN ~/.bashrc | cut -d'"' -f2)" node scripts/analyze.js ...

Scoring (14 categories, 168pts normalized to 100)

Category	Max	What it checks
Commit Health	20	Human vs bot, GPG sigs, code dumps, fake timestamps
Contributors	15	Bus factor, contributor diversity
Code Quality	25	Tests, CI, license, docs, lock files
AI Authenticity	15	AI slop detection in code/README
Social	10	Stars, forks, star/fork ratio, botted stars
Activity	10	Recent pushes, releases
Crypto Safety	5	Token mints, rug patterns, wallet addresses
Dependency Audit	10	Known malicious packages, typosquatting, install hooks, lock files
Fork Quality	8	Fork divergence, suspicious changes, gutted vs meaningful forks
README Quality	10	Install guide, examples, structure, API docs
Maintainability	10	File sizes, nesting, code/doc ratio
Project Health	10	Abandoned detection, velocity, issue response, PR review
Originality	5	Copy-paste, template detection, backer verification
Agent Safety	15	Install hooks, prompt injection, secrets, CI audit, permissions

Grade Scale

A (85+): LEGIT
B (70-84): SOLID
C (55-69): MIXED
D (40-54): SKETCHY
F (<40): AVOID

Key Features

Enhanced dependency audit: Detects known malicious packages (event-stream, ua-parser-js, etc.), typosquatting attacks, install hooks, and estimates transitive dependency bloat
Fork comparison: Analyzes fork divergence, detects cosmetic vs meaningful changes, flags suspicious modifications (removed CI, added wallets), identifies gutted forks
Agent safety: Detects prompt injection, credential harvesting, install script hooks, obfuscated code
Secrets detection: Finds hardcoded API keys, tokens, private keys via regex + entropy
Network mapping: Categorizes all outbound domains (API, CDN, unknown)
CI/CD audit: Checks GitHub Actions for pull_request_target, unpinned actions, secret leaks
Permissions manifest: Summarizes what the code needs to run (like an app permissions list)
Author reputation: Org memberships, suspicious repos, account age
Backer verification: Cross-references investor claims vs committer org membership
Complexity hotspots: Flags large files with deep nesting and high conditional density

Batch File Format

# One repo per line, # for comments
Uniswap/v3-core
https://github.com/aave/aave-v3-core
OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts

Output

Default: rich terminal report with bar charts, sections, verdict. --json: Full structured data for programmatic use. --oneline: RepoName: 85/100 [A] — 2 flags

When Reporting to User

Keep it concise. Lead with score/grade and notable findings. Skip sections with nothing interesting. Example:

"Uniswap/v3-core scored 75/B — 96% GPG-signed, 11 authors, MIT license. Flagged: abandoned (466 days no push), 2,597 transitive deps (bloated), secrets in CI run commands. Agent safety: CAUTION."