Yes. tududi runs. 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 tududi?

On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 7f5da6d15211. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.

What did it cost to test tududi?

The run that produced this verdict cost $0.28: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.

How long does tududi 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 tududi need a GPU?

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

What goes wrong when installing tududi?

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.

Where is the evidence for tududi?

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.

tududi

A calm, open system for organizing life and work. Tasks, projects, notes, areas, and smart workflows - self-hosted or hosted.

Runssource: GitHub homepageJavaScriptMITcommit 7f5da6d15211

JavaScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: expressjs, get things done, gtd, gtd applications, gtd management, nodejs, project management and react.

tududi runs. 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.

All 92 unit test suites pass (1342 tests). 30/33 integration suites pass (826 tests). After fixing the ESM jose issue and MCP crypto polyfill, all 3 previously failing MCP suites pass too. The backend Express server starts and serves HTTP on port 3002 with SQLite.
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: $0.28 (measured)
recorded runs: 1
last tested: 2026-10-01
stars: 3,400
forks: 253
open issues: 23
watchers: 16
size: 48 MB
created: 2023-11-13
last push: 2026-10-01

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed 2026-10-01. 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 tududi, 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.

MCP SDK CJS output uses globalThis.crypto.randomUUID() which is undefined on Node 18 without --experimental-global-webcrypto2 minutes
jose v6 is ESM-only, cannot be require()d by oidc/service.js on Node 181 minute

Install time: under a minute
Cold machine to finish: 80 minutes
Errors hit and fixed: 2 hit, 2 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved: npm run backend:test:unit: 92 suites, 1342 passed, 8 skipped, 0 failed. npm run backend:test (integration): 30 of 33 suites passed (826/827 tests passing), 3 MCP suites failed due to Node 18 crypto issue. After fix: mcp-routing 7/7 passed, mcp-roles 4/4 passed, mcp-tools 96/96 passed. Backend app starts on port 3002 and returns 200 on GET /
Model tokens used: 517,203
Exact commit tested: 7f5da6d15211
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.

Let me run the specific integration test batch that covers the failures, and run the backend tests …
exec
/bin/sh -lc 'cd /work/repo/backend && NODE_ENV=test timeout 120 npx jest tests/integration/mcp/mcp-…
Results are in. Let me compile the final report:
**ARGUSIC_RESULT:** `{"install_succeeded":true, "launch_succeeded":true, "install_minutes":0.5, "er…
2026-10-01T05:38:01.194132Z ERROR codex_core::session: failed to record rollout items: thread 01a0f…
2026-10-01T05:38:01.194182Z ERROR codex_core::session: failed to record rollout items: thread 01a0f…
2026-10-01T05:38:01.194197Z ERROR codex_core::session: failed to record rollout items: thread 01a0f…
tokens used
517,203
Results are in. Let me compile the final report:
**ARGUSIC_RESULT:** `{"install_succeeded":true, "launch_succeeded":true, "install_minutes":0.5, "er…

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 0.5 minutes.
Recovered from all 2 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

Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.

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 0.5 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

tested by	attempt	outcome	score	cost USD	when
Argusic Runner	1/3	Runs	100.00	0.28	2026-10-01 05:38 UTC

Topics (from GitHub)

expressjs get-things-done gtd gtd-applications gtd-management nodejs project-management react reactjs task-management todo

Embed the badge

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

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

Questions

Does tududi run?: Yes. tududi runs. 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 tududi?: On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 7f5da6d15211. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test tududi?: The run that produced this verdict cost $0.28: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does tududi 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 tududi need a GPU?: Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing tududi?: 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.
Where is the evidence for tududi?: 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.