Sample Analysis
This example shows how the analyzer interprets a mixed portfolio of well-known repositories.
Example Set
| Repository | Stars | Forks | Activity | Complexity | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| facebook/react | ~232k | ~47k | ~55 | ~63 | Advanced |
| tensorflow/tensorflow | ~187k | ~74k | ~48 | ~72 | Advanced |
| torvalds/linux | ~185k | ~55k | ~65 | ~68 | Advanced |
| fastapi/fastapi | ~80k | ~6k | ~42 | ~52 | Intermediate |
| firstcontributions/first-contributions | ~45k | ~75k | ~60 | ~28 | Intermediate |
What The Results Suggest
- Linux trends highest on activity because of exceptional contributor count and recent commit volume.
- TensorFlow trends highest on complexity because of file volume and language diversity.
- FastAPI stays in the middle because it is active but comparatively focused.
- first-contributions is active and visible, but structurally simple enough to avoid the Advanced band.
Example JSON Fragment
{
"generatedAt": "2026-03-15T10:30:00.000Z",
"summary": {
"totalAnalyzed": 5,
"successCount": 5,
"errorCount": 0,
"averageActivity": 48.2,
"averageComplexity": 55.6,
"difficultyDistribution": {
"beginner": 0,
"intermediate": 2,
"advanced": 3
}
},
"repositories": [
{
"url": "https://github.com/facebook/react",
"name": "facebook/react",
"metrics": {
"stars": 232000,
"forks": 47000,
"contributors": 1700,
"commitsLast30d": 95,
"fileCount": 8500,
"languageCount": 7,
"hasDependencyFile": true,
"dependencyCountEstimate": 68
},
"activityScore": { "total": 55.3 },
"complexityScore": { "total": 62.8 },
"difficulty": {
"level": "Advanced",
"combined": 59.1,
"description": "Significant experience required"
}
}
]
}Reading The Portfolio Summary
The summary object is useful when the goal is not one repository but a ranked set. You can use average activity, average complexity, and difficulty distribution to compare cohorts of repositories rather than individuals.