GestaltBI/olap-cube-js
Dimensions
Interface surface 2 partial The public API is delimited (__all__, an exports map, exported identifiers).
Can another program use it through a documented, machine-readable surface?
- next: L3 The public API is statically typed (py.typed, type declarations, a typed language). (no py.typed or type declarations)
library ladder · level 2
- ✓ L1 An importable, packaged API exists. package.json npm package
- ✓ L2 The public API is delimited (__all__, an exports map, exported identifiers). package.json package entry point
- ✗ L3 The public API is statically typed (py.typed, type declarations, a typed language). no py.typed or type declarations
- ✗ L4 An API reference is generated from the code (autodoc, mkdocstrings, typedoc, …). no generated API reference
Contract stability 0 absent Not yet: Releases are versioned (semver tags or versioned changelog sections).
Can integrators rely on it not changing under them?
- next: L1 Releases are versioned (semver tags or versioned changelog sections). (no semver tags or versioned releases)
all ladder · level 0
- ✗ L1 Releases are versioned (semver tags or versioned changelog sections). no semver tags or versioned releases
- ✓ L2 A changelog exists and marks breaking changes. CHANGELOG.md marks breaking changes
- ✗ L3 A deprecation mechanism is used in code (warnings, @deprecated, Deprecation/Sunset headers) or the API is versioned. no deprecation mechanism or API versioning
- ✗ L4 Across tagged releases, no OpenAPI operation, CLI option or __all__ symbol was removed without first being deprecated. fewer than two tagged releases to compare
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 n/a Not applicable: owns no persistent data.
Can its data get in and out, in bulk, in open formats, with an explicit schema?
Agent ergonomics 0 absent Not yet: Errors are specific exception types, and library code never calls sys.exit.
Can an automated caller use it without guessing, and recover from failure?
- next: L1 Errors are specific exception types, and library code never calls sys.exit. (no exception classes)
library ladder · level 0
- ✗ L1 Errors are specific exception types, and library code never calls sys.exit. no exception classes
- ✓ L2 Inputs are validated with messages naming the bad argument. vendors/Array.find.js 2 matchesvendors/Array.from.js 2 matches
- ✗ L3 Timeouts and retries are configurable. no timeout parameter
- ✗ L4 Agent docs, and examples that run as tests (doctests). examples don't run as tests
Embeddability 2 partial Installable as a package (a package manifest).
Can another system run and compose it without a human?
- next: L3 Published to a public registry, with at most 10 runtime dependencies. (not published to a registry)
library ladder · level 2
- ✓ L1 Importable from source. package.json npm package
- ✓ L2 Installable as a package (a package manifest). package.json package manifest
- ✗ L3 Published to a public registry, with at most 10 runtime dependencies. not published to a registry
- ✗ L4 Optional features behind extras/features. no optional extras
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 0 absent Not yet: Logs through a standard logger namespace and never prints from library code.
Can an operator, or an orchestrating agent, tell whether it works and why not?
- next: L1 Logs through a standard logger namespace and never prints from library code. (no standard logger)
library ladder · level 0
- ✗ L1 Logs through a standard logger namespace and never prints from library code. no standard logger
- ✗ L2 Log levels are used meaningfully (at least two levels). fewer than two log levels used
- ✗ L3 Optional metrics or tracing hooks. no metrics or tracing hooks
- ✗ L4 OpenTelemetry instrumentation available. no OpenTelemetry instrumentation
Change legibility 2 partial CI runs the tests; applications pin dependencies (libraries and zero-dependency projects are exempt).
Can an agent change it safely with limited context?
- next: 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. (0% of code is typed (< 70%))
all ladder · level 2
- ✓ L1 A README and some tests. README.mdspec/data/products.js 34 test files
- ✓ L2 CI runs the tests; applications pin dependencies (libraries and zero-dependency projects are exempt). .github/workflows/ci.yml library or zero-dependency project: lockfile not required
- ✗ 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. 0% of code is typed (< 70%)
- ✓ L4 No import cycles, and agent docs (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, llms.txt). CLAUDE.md
Make or buy
Make with agents
114,877 output + 2,871,925 input tokens
on anthropic:claude-opus-5-5 ≈ $5.
1.3 agent-hours · 5.2 human days (0.9 steering + 4.2 rediscovering history).
$4,009 over 3 years
Buy (adopt as is)
15 min to running (via library) + 60 min to first use (via library).
480 min/year of upgrades; price $0/year.
$1,692 over 3 years
Buying wins below $772 per year. How this is estimated.
Classic COCOMO vs neosloc value
Classic COCOMO (sloccount)
1.41 KSLOC → 3.5 person-months over 4.0 months.
$39k
The effort to write it by hand, as COCOMO priced it in 1981.
neosloc value (neoCOCOMO)
Reproduce with agents: 0.5 PM (×0.15 of classic; 88% of behaviour captured by tests, contract and docs).
Rediscover uncaptured history: 0.2 PM (28 fixes in 227 commits by 3 authors).
× leverage 0.86 (integrability) × obsolescence 0.95.
$7k (0.6 PM)
What survives
17% 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 | 6211f7ef51f9 | 0.8.0 | 0.86 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 6211f7ef51f9 | 0.7.4 | 0.86 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 6211f7ef51f9 | 0.7.3 | 0.86 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 6211f7ef51f9 | 0.7.2 | 0.86 | buy |
| 2026-10-07 | 6211f7ef51f9 | 0.7.1 | 0.86 | buy |