lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card
This card provides a user-friendly way to fully control map-based vacuums in Home Assistant. Supported brands include Xiaomi (Roborock/Viomi/Dreame/Roidmi/Valetudo/Valetudo RE), Neato, Wyze, Roomba, Ecovacs (and probably more).
Could not verifysource: GitHubTypeScriptMITcommit 045c3ac946d4
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: deebot, ecovacs, home assistant, home automation, homeassistant, lovelace card, myneato and neato.
Argusic could not get lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card running. An Argusic agent installed it in 0.2 minutes and hit 1 error and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
npm install succeeds, TypeScript/Rollup build completes with zero errors, producing a valid ES-module JS bundle at dist/xiaomi-vacuum-map-card.js
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 80 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.
- tslib v2.1.0 has an 'exports' field in package.json lacking subpath entries (.package.json, .tslib.es6.js), causing Node 18 to reject require() calls0.1 minutes
- Install time
- under a minute
- Cold machine to finish
- 4 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 1 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- npm run rollup exited 0 producing dist/xiaomi-vacuum-map-card.js (428K); node --input-type=module import of .mjs file gave 'window is not defined' (expected for browser-only card); npm run build (lint+rollup+add-version) exited 0
- Model tokens used
- 40,528
- Exact commit tested
- 045c3ac946d4
- 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
- Whether it works at all
- this run verified nothing, so this page makes no claim either way
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
succeeded in 0ms:
{"npm":"ok","build":"ok","module":"valid-es","error":"window not defined (expected)"}
Here's the final report.
```json
{"install_succeeded": true, "launch_succeeded": true, "install_minutes": 0.2, "errors": [{"msg": "t…
```
tokens used
40,528
Here's the final report.
```json
{"install_succeeded": true, "launch_succeeded": true, "install_minutes": 0.2, "errors": [{"msg": "t…
```Replay 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
- Installed in 0.2 minutes.
- Recovered from all 1 error without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
- Measured 2 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What did not, or is not known
- An agent with no time limit did not get it running.
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
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 2/3 | Unverified | 80.00 | 0.03 | |
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Unverified | 80.00 | 0.03 |
Topics (from GitHub)
deebotecovacshome-assistanthome-automationhomeassistantlovelace-cardmyneatoneatoroborockroombaroomba980vacuumvaletudovaletudo-rewyzexiaomixiaomi-vacuum
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card)Questions
- Does lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card run?
- Argusic could not verify that lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 0 minutes, hitting 1 error on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 045c3ac946d4. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card?
- 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 lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card take to install?
- 0.2 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 lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card?
- 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 lovelace-xiaomi-vacuum-map-card?
- 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.