risa-labs-inc/BossConsole - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Open-source, multi-platform harness for AI agents - a native, multi-threaded operator's console (JVM, not Electron) to run Claude Code, Codex, Gemini or OpenCode with a real browser, terminal, editor, secrets & 200+ MCP tools. Built for enterprises, science & research.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 66/100

External PR Merge Rate: 44%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is risa-labs-inc/BossConsole welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

risa-labs-inc/BossConsole has a recorded first-timer success rate of 12.5%. Repositories ranked A typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

Maintainers in risa-labs-inc/BossConsole respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 0.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 65.7 C-Rank™ score (A Tier) represent?

The C-Rank™ system evaluates GitHub projects on a 0–100 scale using real data: PR merge rates, review turnaround time, active maintainer presence, and first-time contributor success. A score of 65.7 places risa-labs-inc/BossConsole in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for risa-labs-inc/BossConsole?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for risa-labs-inc/BossConsole is 44.1%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in risa-labs-inc/BossConsole?

risa-labs-inc/BossConsole currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

risa-labs-inc
risa-labs-inc/BossConsoleA•Welcoming811
GitHub
Back to Explorer
risa-labs-inc

risa-labs-inc/BossConsole

811
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(66/100)Kotlin

Open-source, multi-platform harness for AI agents - a native, multi-threaded operator's console (JVM, not Electron) to run Claude Code, Codex, Gemini or OpenCode with a real browser, terminal, editor, secrets & 200+ MCP tools. Built for enterprises, science & research.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Strict Architecture Gatekeeper

Warmth Score
6.9/10
Patience Score
7.8/10
Nitpick Rate
30%

Strict review standards in risa-labs-inc/BossConsole. Ensure PR scope matches issue requirements closely before requesting review.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Ensure code complies with the project coding style
  • •Keep PRs scoped to a single concern
  • •Include context and link to the related issue

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit PRs without linking an issue
  • •Do not break existing tests without fixing them
  • •Do not mix unrelated refactors in a single PR
Response Velocity
-
No reviewer activity recorded

Average Response Latency

Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.

Merge Efficiency
44.1%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
12.5%
Accepts new contributor PRs

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
43 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
44.1%
Merge Gauge
12.5%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe21/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.

GetMerged C-Rank badge for risa-labs-inc/BossConsole
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/risa-labs-inc/BossConsole)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/risa-labs-inc/BossConsole?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Follow-ups from Claude's review of #1382 (merged as 94ea7ff). Medium - no test checks that the current attempt completes. Hard-wiring isCurrent() to false in PasskeyAuthViewModel.launchAuthentication breaks login entirely, yet all five tests in PasskeyAuthViewModelSessionLifecycleTest still pass. In test 1, complete the second gate with Result.success(Unit), then assert secondSuccess == 1 and isLoading == false while firstSuccess == 0. Low - positional arguments are unpinned. passkeyAuthentication(email, credentialId) takes two Strings, so a transposition would compile. Record the arguments in the fake and assert that credentialId passes through (and is null on the email path). Low - registerPasskey (PasskeyAuthService.kt ~:124/:137) still converts a cancel into Result.failure. Give it the same treatment, or scope the propagateCancellation KDoc to the authentication path. Low - an abandoned attempt can still establish a session if the cancel lands after polling has returned success (C

📅 Opened Sep 25, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

From the merge review on #741 (none blocked the merge; finding 1 is the one to take first): saveOwner is a non-reactive read captured at composition (WorkspaceButton.kt:99). SplitViewStateRegistry.getState reads a MutableStateFlow outside Compose snapshot state, and registration happens in a LaunchedEffect after first composition, so the dialog's rebind fence can silently drop a save for a live window and log "deregistered" for one that never registered. Resolve the owner at press time inside onSave, fence against that local, key the latch on windowId alone, and make the miss log distinguish never-registered from deregistered. The call-site wiring is the untested half, and every defect in this series lived there. Extracting the menu effect's save wiring into an internal function would let ordinary unit tests pin: snapshot built from the invoking window's own id, a second event coalescing into exactly one re-run on the latest layout, re-run dropped after deregistration, dialog ignoring

📅 Opened Sep 24, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Leftovers from the four review rounds on #822 (all non-blocking, none a disclosure or authorization defect; full derivations in the review comments on #822): McpJsonDepth.kt's KDoc enumerates three guarded parses on the invoke path; there are now four (the pre-pass's parseElement joined them in #822). One clause keeps the drift-prevention file truthful. The {{secret:…}} marker is case-sensitive: {{SECRET:…}} reaches a handler as literal text. Decide whether that is the contract (and document it) or normalize. The ledger sanitizer's value class [^\s&,;}]+ stops at the first }, so a substituted value containing } leaves a trailing plaintext tail in redacted output (TOKEN=[REDACTED]}}tail). Agent-authored text only. The residual lookbehind hole: {{secret:<plaintext>}} with no keyword prefix is not redacted in the malformed-refusal snippet. Refused before any prompt; hygiene. parseMcpToolArgs's failure log interpolates t.toString(), and kotlinx appends the offending document. Unreacha

📅 Opened Sep 24, 2026💬 9 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Follow-up to #1455 (central log redaction). The append path wraps throwables so rendered channels (SLF4J line, file writer) sanitize messages and stack traces, but the wrapped throwable's stack frames are copied verbatim, and listeners receive that throwable. A listener that calls stackTraceToString() - a Console panel, a crash reporter - renders raw frame filenames, and a hand-built or native frame can embed a path like /Users/ci/keys.pem. The file path is sanitized at render; the listener path is not. Options: sanitize frame filenames when wrapping (frames are reconstructable via StackTraceElement(String, String, String, int)), or document that listeners must render through LogSanitizer.

📅 Opened Sep 24, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

#1485 fixed runInTerminal argument quoting; the fix is verified correct (quotePath escapes embedded single quotes on POSIX and PowerShell), but the new pinning test has gaps flagged in review: No embedded-single-quote test case - the one input class that decides whether the escaping is real. Add table-driven coverage: ', ", backslash, empty string, $(), backticks, newline, ;, |, &&. The test installs GitTerminalEventBus.ipcBridge and nulls it in finally instead of saving/restoring the previous bridge. The stub bridge drops other producers' events while installed - cross-test interference if the suite runs classes in parallel. The retry loop races the concurrency it tolerates and publishes duplicate bus events; a deterministic injection seam would be better. quotePath is only exercised through two benign inputs despite being load-bearing for a security property. Good first issue for whoever wants to pick it up.

📅 Opened Sep 24, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute
Looking for more Kotlin beginner tasks?Explore Kotlin GFI

Contributor Community Vibe Feedback

Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.

Have you contributed to this repo?

Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.

3 ratings required
Maintainer helpfulness
Review speed
Beginner friendliness

Contributor Compatibility & Review Speed Analysis for risa-labs-inc/BossConsole

When evaluating whether to contribute to risa-labs-inc/BossConsole, response velocity and maintainer engagement are crucial. GetMerged continuously tracks pull request trajectories, first-comment latency, and code review rounds to help developers avoid submitting pull requests to backlogged repositories.

Currently, maintainers of risa-labs-inc/BossConsole acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 44.1% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to risa-labs-inc/BossConsole

01

Is risa-labs-inc/BossConsole welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

risa-labs-inc/BossConsole has a recorded first-timer success rate of 12.5%. Repositories ranked Welcoming typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

02

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

The initial maintainer response time averages ~-. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 65.7 C-Rank™ score represent?

The C-Rank™ index scores repositories on a 0 to 100 scale using an objective formula: external PR merge rates, initial response speed, active maintainer count, and first-time contributor retention. A score of 65.7 places risa-labs-inc/BossConsole in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for risa-labs-inc/BossConsole?

The external pull request merge rate is 44.1%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.

05

Are there beginner Good First Issues open in risa-labs-inc/BossConsole?

Yes, risa-labs-inc/BossConsole currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.

GetMerged C-Rank™ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for risa-labs-inc/BossConsole are automatically retrieved via the public GitHub API and recalculated daily. Insider pull requests submitted by repository owners or organization members are excluded from merge rate calculations to preserve objective external contributor statistics.