eclipse-mosquitto/mosquitto
Dimensions
Interface surface 0 absent Not yet: A programmatic surface exists (routes, a CLI or a library).
Can another program use it through a documented, machine-readable surface?
- next: L1 A programmatic surface exists (routes, a CLI or a library). (no service, CLI, library or frontend detected)
none ladder · level 0
- ✗ L1 A programmatic surface exists (routes, a CLI or a library). no service, CLI, library or frontend detected
Contract stability n/a Not applicable: no service, cli, library, desktop or format surface.
Can integrators rely on it not changing under them?
Events n/a Not applicable: no service and no long-running CLI mode (batch CLIs, libraries and desktop apps have no events).
Can others react to state changes without polling?
Identity n/a Not applicable: uses no credentials and has no service surface.
Can a machine act with its own revocable, least-privilege identity?
Data portability 0 absent Not yet: The data schema is explicit (migrations, DDL, schema files).
Can its data get in and out, in bulk, in open formats, with an explicit schema?
- next: L1 The data schema is explicit (migrations, DDL, schema files). (no migrations or schema files)
all ladder · level 0
- ✗ L1 The data schema is explicit (migrations, DDL, schema files). no migrations or schema files
- ✗ L2 An export exists (endpoint or command, not only the UI). no export
- ✗ L3 A bulk export in an open format, and a bulk import. no open export format
- ✗ L4 The export format is documented and the round trip is tested. the export format isn't documented
Agent ergonomics n/a Not applicable: no service or cli or library or desktop surface.
Can an automated caller use it without guessing, and recover from failure?
Embeddability n/a Not applicable: no service or cli or library or desktop surface.
Can another system run and compose it without a human?
Extensibility 0 absent Not yet: Internal seams: a registry, registration function or plugin manager.
Can behaviour be added without modifying the code?
- next: L1 Internal seams: a registry, registration function or plugin manager. (no registry or registration function)
all ladder · level 0
- ✗ L1 Internal seams: a registry, registration function or plugin manager. no registry or registration function
- ✗ L2 The docs show how to add behaviour through those seams (even in-tree). no registration functions to document
- ✗ L3 Out-of-tree extensions are discovered (entry points, a plugin directory, configuration) without editing the package. extensions must be added inside the package
- ✗ L4 The extension API is versioned, has lifecycle hooks, and has example extensions. the extension API isn't versioned
Observability n/a Not applicable: no service or cli or library or desktop surface.
Can an operator, or an orchestrating agent, tell whether it works and why not?
Change legibility 1 ad hoc A README and some tests.
Can an agent change it safely with limited context?
- next: L2 CI runs the tests; applications pin dependencies (libraries and zero-dependency projects are exempt). (no lockfile (applications should pin dependencies))
all ladder · level 1
- ✓ L1 A README and some tests. README.mdtest/apps/ctrl/ctrl-args.py 687 test files
- ✗ L2 CI runs the tests; applications pin dependencies (libraries and zero-dependency projects are exempt). no lockfile (applications should pin dependencies)
- ✗ L3 At least 90% of modules fit 32k tokens and no file exceeds 12k; test/source token ratio at least 0.3; at least 70% of the code is typed. 84% of modules fit 32k tokens; 6 files over 12k
- ✗ L4 No import cycles, and agent docs (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, llms.txt). no agent docs (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, llms.txt)
Make or buy
Make with agents
3,567,805 output + 89,195,125 input tokens
on anthropic:claude-opus-5-5 ≈ $140.
39.6 agent-hours · 324.4 human days (35.7 steering + 288.8 rediscovering history).
$252,371 over 3 years
Buy (adopt as is)
60 min to running (via –) + 3843 min to first use (via none).
15 min/year of upgrades; price $0/year.
$4,428 over 3 years
Buying wins below $82,648 per year. How this is estimated.
Classic COCOMO vs neosloc value
Classic COCOMO (sloccount)
57.79 KSLOC → 169.9 person-months over 17.6 months.
$1.9M
The effort to write it by hand, as COCOMO priced it in 1981.
neosloc value (neoCOCOMO)
Reproduce with agents: 36.1 PM (×0.21 of classic; 75% of behaviour captured by tests, contract and docs).
Rediscover uncaptured history: 13.8 PM (1601 fixes in 4599 commits by 195 authors).
× leverage 0.78 (integrability) × obsolescence 0.9.
$395k (35.0 PM)
What survives
21% of the classic figure
28% of the replacement cost lives only in code and history.
History
| Evaluated | Commit | neosloc | Index | Make or buy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-07 | 83f2620f0b95 | 0.8.0 | 0.25 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 83f2620f0b95 | 0.7.4 | 0.25 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 83f2620f0b95 | 0.7.3 | 0.25 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 83f2620f0b95 | 0.7.2 | 0.25 | buy |