Cowart
Runs with mockssource: GitHubJavaScriptMITcommit 43fc8882daf2
JavaScript, MIT licensed.
Cowart runs, with stand-ins for the services it depends on. An Argusic agent installed it in 0.5 minutes and hit 2 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
Cowart installs, builds, and all quality checks pass, MCP tools are available, analytics probes (GA4, PostHog with mocked endpoints) report OK, cold-install probe confirms dependency-free operation, and Vite production build produces dist/ with 6.3MB JS bundle.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 92 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- ReferenceError: crypto is not defined in mcp/lib/posthog-analytics.mjs on Node 18 ESM (bare crypto is not a global in Node 18 ES modules)3 minutes
- Vite 7 dev server requires Node ^20.19.0||>=22.12.0; Node 18 cannot run npm run dev1 minute
- Install time
- under a minute
- Cold machine to finish
- 16 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 2 hit, 2 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- npm run quality exited 0, all 8 checks passed: check:plugin (metadata OK), check (17 files syntax OK), check:artifacts (artifacts match source), probe:mcp:cold (MCP dependency-free install OK, 507ms startup), probe:mcp (MCP tools & widget resource OK, 509ms), probe:analytics OK, probe:ga4 OK, probe:posthog OK
- Model tokens used
- 203,558
- Exact commit tested
- 43fc8882daf2
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
- Behaviour against real services
- this run was verified against stand-in services only
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
- `npm run quality` - all 8 quality checks pass
exec
/bin/sh -lc "cd /work/repo && echo '{\"errors\": [\"crypto not defined in Node 18 ESM\"]}' | jq -e …
succeeded in 0ms:
{
"errors": [
"crypto not defined in Node 18 ESM"
]
}
json ok
tokens used
203,558Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Recovered from all 2 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Only reached a running state against stand-in services, so nothing here proves it works against the real ones.
- Took 0.5 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 3 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
Of the 4 JavaScript projects Argusic has installed and timed, Cowart was the 3rd fastest to reach a running state, and 1 of 4 reached one at all.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Runs with mocks | 92.00 | 0.07 |
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/cowart)Questions
- Does Cowart run?
- Cowart runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 1 minutes, hitting 2 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test Cowart?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 43fc8882daf2. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test Cowart?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.07: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does Cowart take to install?
- 0.5 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does Cowart need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing Cowart?
- 2 things broke in the recorded run, and 2 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- How does Cowart compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 4 JavaScript projects Argusic has installed and timed, Cowart was the 3rd fastest to reach a running state, and 1 of 4 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for Cowart?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.