Does ShadowEditor run?

Yes. ShadowEditor runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 8 minutes, hitting 7 errors on the way, and recorded the session.

How did Argusic test ShadowEditor?

On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 49a6e7d506d3. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.

What did it cost to test ShadowEditor?

The run that produced this verdict cost $0.10: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.

How long does ShadowEditor take to install?

8 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 ShadowEditor need a GPU?

Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.

What goes wrong when installing ShadowEditor?

7 things broke in the recorded run, and 7 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.

Where is the evidence for ShadowEditor?

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.

ShadowEditor

Cross-platform 3D scene editor based on three.js, golang and mongodb for desktop and web.

Runssource: GitHub homepageJavaScriptMITcommit 49a6e7d506d3

JavaScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: editor, game engine, gis, golang, lol, scene, shadow editor and three.

ShadowEditor runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 8 minutes and hit 7 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

ShadowEditor v0.6.1 server binary and web frontend build successfully, server starts on port 2020 and serves HTTP 200 on /, /index.html, /view.html, /favicon.ico, and /api/Initialize/Initialize. Go test suite: 30 pass, 4 fail (3 pre-existing external/test-design issues, 1 missing init data).
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

verdict: Runs
Argusic Score: 100 / 100
cost of the verifying run: $0.10 (measured)
recorded runs: 1
last tested: 2026-10-06
stars: 1,706
forks: 322
open issues: 28
watchers: 62
size: 76 MB
created: 2017-06-18
last push: 2026-05-25

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed 2026-10-06. 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.

Time lost to each failure while testing ShadowEditor, drawn from the recorded run — Every bar is a failure the agent recorded, with the time it cost. Drawn from this run, not from anywhere else.

What went wrong, in the agent's own words

The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.

Go 1.14.3 required but not pre-installed; downloaded from go.dev2 minutes
MongoDB 7.0.14 required but not pre-installed; downloaded from mongodb.com2 minutes
npm dependencies not pre-installed1 minute
TestGetCurrentUser fails: 'Administrator role is not found' in MongoDB
TestPost fails: passport.baidu.com returns 404 (external dependency)
TestTraction fails: transactions require replica set, not standalone

Install time: 8 minutes
Cold machine to finish: 11 minutes
Errors hit and fixed: 7 hit, 7 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved: curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' http://localhost:2020/ returned 200; ./ShadowEditor version printed v0.6.1; go test ran 34 tests with 30 pass/4 fail
Model tokens used: 143,552
Exact commit tested: 49a6e7d506d3
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.

[negroni] 2026-10-06T10:26:22Z | 200 |    121.623µs | localhost:2020 | POST /api/Initialize/Initial…
API Init: 200
exec
/bin/sh -lc '# Kill server
pkill -f "ShadowEditor serve" 2>/dev/null || true
echo "Done"' in /work/repo
 exited 143 in 0ms:
exec
/bin/sh -lc "echo \"ARGUSIC_RESULT: {\\\"install_succeeded\\\": true, \\\"launch_succeeded\\\": tru…
 succeeded in 0ms:
tokens used
143,552

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.
Recovered from all 7 errors 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.

What did not, or is not known

Took 8 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 editor projects Argusic has installed and timed, ShadowEditor was the 3rd fastest to reach a running state, and 4 of 4 reached one at all.

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 8 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

tested by	attempt	outcome	score	cost USD	when
Argusic Runner	1/3	Runs	100.00	0.10	2026-10-06 10:26 UTC

Topics (from GitHub)

editor game-engine gis golang lol scene shadow-editor three three-editor threejs web-gis webgl

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/ShadowEditor.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/shadoweditor)

Questions

Does ShadowEditor run?: Yes. ShadowEditor runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 8 minutes, hitting 7 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test ShadowEditor?: On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 49a6e7d506d3. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test ShadowEditor?: The run that produced this verdict cost $0.10: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does ShadowEditor take to install?: 8 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 ShadowEditor need a GPU?: Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing ShadowEditor?: 7 things broke in the recorded run, and 7 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
How does ShadowEditor compare with the alternatives?: Of the 4 editor projects Argusic has installed and timed, ShadowEditor was the 3rd fastest to reach a running state, and 4 of 4 reached one at all.
Where is the evidence for ShadowEditor?: 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.