uwuclxdy/clauth - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Claude Code multi-account manager, usage monitor (CLI, TUI & cross-account delegation via MCP)

C-Rank Grade: D (Risky) - 12/100

External PR Merge Rate: -

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: -

Frequently Asked Questions

Is uwuclxdy/clauth welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

uwuclxdy/clauth has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. Repositories ranked D 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 uwuclxdy/clauth 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 12.0 C-Rank™ score (D 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 12.0 places uwuclxdy/clauth in the D tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for uwuclxdy/clauth?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for uwuclxdy/clauth is 0.0%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in uwuclxdy/clauth?

uwuclxdy/clauth currently has 9 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

uwuclxdy
uwuclxdy/clauthD•Risky242
GitHub
Back to Explorer
uwuclxdy

uwuclxdy/clauth

242
InactiveD•Risky(12/100)Low Sample (<20 PRs)Rust

Claude Code multi-account manager, usage monitor (CLI, TUI & cross-account delegation via MCP)

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Empathetic Technical Mentor

Warmth Score
7.5/10
Patience Score
8.2/10
Nitpick Rate
20%

Collaborative maintainer environment in uwuclxdy/clauth. Reviews community pull requests with focus on project quality.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in uwuclxdy/clauth focus heavily on practical implementation feedback, code formatting standards, and issue reproduction details.

Hidden Friction Signals

Unlinked PRs without issue context and changes that fail automated test suites face the highest review friction.

Unwritten Rules

  • •1) Keep PR scope strictly aligned with the linked issue.
  • •2) Ensure local linters pass before opening a review.
  • •3) Maintain full test coverage for modified logic.

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
0.0%
Selective PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
0.0%
No first-timer merges recorded in window

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
1 core
Single maintainer review bottleneck
Diagnostic Health HUD
0.0%
Merge Gauge
0.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe0/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Current behaviour Burn-aware switching (Config tab switch mode = burn-aware, burn_aware_switching in config.toml) projects an account's 5h utilization forward from its recent burn rate. That rate comes from the OAuth history series (usage_history.jsonl), which only the Claude OAuth fetch leg writes. An account clauth judges on its provider's windows (Profile::usage_cache_is_third_party: any provider-recognised or generic api-key endpoint account, with or without an OAuth login beside it) has no series of its provider window. An OAuth login beside the key builds one for the Anthropic pool, which is never this account's rate. So every projection site skips it: the burn-aware walk (is_exhausted_active_from_usage in src/fallback.rs) returns window.utilization >= member.threshold when third_party is set App::burn_rate_for in src/tui/app.rs returns None for such a profile, so the TUI's startup one-shot (startup_rate) passes no rate, and the Overview's projected-switch line (projected_switch

📅 Opened Oct 12, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 70/100Contribute

Current state src/providers/mod.rs owns ms_to_iso, the epoch-ms -> ISO helper, and src/daemon/status_json.rs reaches into providers for it since #118. Its sibling epoch_secs_to_iso lives in src/usage/fetch.rs and is re-exported from crate::usage. src/daemon/gateway.rs still converts by hand: epoch_secs_to_iso((tick.wall_ms / 1000) as i64). Expected ms_to_iso lives next to epoch_secs_to_iso in src/usage/fetch.rs and is re-exported from crate::usage the same way. The z.ai, Alibaba and MiniMax providers, status_json.rs and gateway.rs all call it, and every published timestamp stays byte-identical. Where to look src/providers/mod.rs: ms_to_iso and its tests in tests/inline/providers.rs src/usage/fetch.rs: epoch_secs_to_iso src/daemon/status_json.rs: iso_from_ms src/daemon/gateway.rs: the wall_ms conversion Acceptance no hand-written / 1000) as i64 feeding epoch_secs_to_iso remains the existing ISO string tests keep their exact expected strings and stay green the ms_to_iso tests move wit

📅 Opened Oct 11, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Current behaviour A background delegate hands its result back through two paths, both bound to the session that started it: the mcp-await-job hook while that session runs, and the resume notice (src/hook_jobs.rs) when that same session is resumed. A session that quits and is never resumed leaves its done results unnamed. They sit in ~/.clauth/jobs/ until the startup sweep reaps them a day after they finish, so a result the account already paid for reaches nobody. Example: start a background delegate from a session in ~/work/app, /exit before it finishes, then open a fresh claude in ~/work/app. Nothing tells the new session the result exists. Only monitor with no job_ids, or clauth jobs, would show it. Expected On SessionStart, a session is told about every finished, uncollected background result that was started from the same project dir by a session that is no longer running: told on any SessionStart (startup, resume, clear, fork), at most once per session id, and again on compact, s

📅 Opened Oct 8, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 100/100Contribute

Current behaviour The session index (src/sessions.rs) walks every *.jsonl under ~/.claude/projects/ (and each runtime store) down to WALK_MAX_DEPTH. Workflow runs write a journal.jsonl at projects/<slug>/<session>/subagents/workflows/wf_<id>/journal.jsonl. It is a run log, not a conversation transcript: its first record has only the keys agentId, key and type ("type": "started"). Each journal still becomes a session row, with the id journal (its filename stem). On a store with 389 workflow runs, all 389 collapse into one journal row in clauth sessions, clauth sessions --json and the daemon API's session listing, and clauth info journal resolves to whichever journal the index happened to keep. Expected A workflow run journal is not a session: the index skips a journal.jsonl whose parent directory is a wf_* directory under workflows/. Every real transcript keeps listing, the subagent transcripts beside the journal in that same wf_* directory (agent-<hex>.jsonl) included. Where to look s

📅 Opened Oct 8, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Current behaviour start_walk in src/fallback.rs skips a chain member whose name does not resolve to a profile. So a non-empty fallback_chain whose names are all dangling gives zero rows, and cmd_start's --auto arm refuses through format::start_refusal with the headroom wording. Example: profiles.toml has fallback_chain = ["alice", "bob"] and neither profile exists. clauth start --auto refuses with --auto found no chain member with headroom, which names the wrong cause: no member is short on headroom, none exists. Only a hand-edited profiles.toml gets here, since deleting a profile already removes it from the chain. Expected When the chain is non-empty and none of its names resolve, the refusal reads exactly: --auto found no chain member that exists (alice, bob) (the names in chain order, joined with , ). A chain whose members all exist but are all blocked keeps the current headroom wording. Where to look src/fallback.rs: start_walk (the config.find(name) skip) src/format.rs: start_re

📅 Opened Oct 8, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute
Looking for more Rust beginner tasks?Explore Rust 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 uwuclxdy/clauth

When evaluating whether to contribute to uwuclxdy/clauth, 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 uwuclxdy/clauth acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 0.0% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to uwuclxdy/clauth

01

Is uwuclxdy/clauth welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

uwuclxdy/clauth has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. Repositories ranked Risky 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 12.0 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 12.0 places uwuclxdy/clauth in the Risky tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for uwuclxdy/clauth?

The external pull request merge rate is 0.0%. 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 uwuclxdy/clauth?

Yes, uwuclxdy/clauth currently has 9 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 uwuclxdy/clauth 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.