domain-locker
🌐 The all-in-one tool, for keeping track of your domain name portfolio. Got domain names? Get Domain Locker!
Runssource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit 65eb45d2e4a4
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: alternative to, automation, dashboard, docker, domain investment, domain management, monitoring and saas.
domain-locker runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 5.5 minutes and hit 1 error and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
Dependencies installed, all 37 tests pass, production build completes, SSR server serves /api/health (200), / (200), /login (200) correctly.
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 100 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.
- Node version mismatch: container had v18.19.1 but project requires >=20.0.0 (engine-strict=true in .npmrc)2.5 minutes
- Install time
- 6 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 9 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 1 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- npm test: 4 test files, 37 tests all passed. Server launch on port 3000: curl /api/health returned HTTP 200 with status ok message, curl /login returned title Login | Domain Locker, curl / returned HTTP 200 with SSR-rendered HTML.
- Model tokens used
- 88,406
- Exact commit tested
- 65eb45d2e4a4
- 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
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
- Used the public Supabase dev credentials from `.env.sample` — no mocks needed
tokens used
88,406
All tasks complete. Here's what happened:
**1 error encountered and fixed:**
- Node version mismatch (v18.19.1 in container, project needs >=20). Installed nvm and Node 20.20.2.
**Results:**
- `npm install` — 1809 packages, no failures
- `npm test` — 4 test files, **37 passed**
- `npm run build` — production build completes, SSR server bundle created
- Server launch — `/api/health` returns HTTP 200 with `{"status":"ok","message":"Houston, We're sti…
- Used the public Supabase dev credentials from `.env.sample` — no mocks neededReplay 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
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 5.5 minutes.
- Recovered from all 1 error without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
- Measured 2 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 5.5 minutes after the clone.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
Topics (from GitHub)
alternative-toautomationdashboarddockerdomain-investmentdomain-managementmonitoringsaassaas-applicationself-hostedstatus-pageweb-security
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/domain-locker)Questions
- Does domain-locker run?
- Yes. domain-locker runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 6 minutes, hitting 1 error on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test domain-locker?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 65eb45d2e4a4. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test domain-locker?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.03: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does domain-locker take to install?
- 5.5 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 domain-locker need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing domain-locker?
- 1 thing broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for domain-locker?
- All 2 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.