mapcn
Beautiful map components. 100% Free, Zero config, one command setup.
Runssource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit d160bd767bc6
TypeScript, MIT licensed.
mapcn runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 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.
npm install completes with EBADENGINE warnings but succeeds, npm run build produces a complete Next.js static+SSG build with 28 routes (25 pages) returning HTTP 200 on all checked endpoints, and npm run registry:build builds all 9 registry components successfully.
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.js v18.19.1 is too old for Next.js 16 (requires >=20.9.0). npm install printed EBADENGINE warnings for several packages and next build failed with 'You are using Node.js 18.19.1. For Next.js, Node.js version >=20.9.0 is required.'2 minutes
- Install time
- 5 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 6 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 1 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- curl -s -o /dev/null -w %{http_code} http://localhost:3003/ returned 200; same for /docs, /docs/installation, /blocks, /llms.txt, /view/analytics-map, /view/choropleth. npm run build exited 0 with all pages compiled. npm run registry:build exited 0 building 9 registry components.
- Model tokens used
- 67,168
- Exact commit tested
- d160bd767bc6
- 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.
/bin/sh -lc 'pkill -f "next start" 2>/dev/null; echo "done"' in /work/repo exited 143 in 0ms: exited 143 in 63989ms: ▲ Next.js 16.3.1 - Local: http://localhost:3003 - Network: http://172.21.0.15:3003 ✓ Ready in 78ms ✓ Running next.config.ts took 29ms Now let me calculate the time and prepare the result. I started at approximately 20:55 UTC, and it'… tokens used 67,168 Now let me calculate the time and prepare the result. I started at approximately 20:55 UTC, and it'…
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
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 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 4 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 minutes after the clone.
Run history
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/mapcn)Questions
- Does mapcn run?
- Yes. mapcn runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 5 minutes, hitting 1 error on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test mapcn?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit d160bd767bc6. 4 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test mapcn?
- 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 mapcn take to install?
- 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 mapcn need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing mapcn?
- 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 mapcn?
- All 4 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.