Show HN: I audited my own eight repos. Half of them lied in the README

Description and use

Here's a brief summary of the open-source project:

This project involves auditing a personal GitHub repository to ensure its README accurately reflects the actual development workflow. The audit process can be useful in identifying discrepancies between the README and the actual project activity. However, it requires manual inspection and verification of various quality signals before adoption.

**Value:**
The project's value lies in its ability to help developers and users verify the accuracy of a project's README and workflow. This can be particularly useful for internal workflows, prototypes, or when evaluating open-source projects for adoption.

**Practical Adoption Path:**

1. **Manual Inspection:** Before adopting the project, users need to manually inspect the README and activity of the repository to verify the accuracy of the workflow.
2. **Verify Quality Signals:** Users should also verify other quality signals such as license, maintenance, documentation, issues, and release cadence to ensure the project is reliable and maintainable.
3. **Integration:** Once the project has been verified, users can integrate it into their workflow, taking into account the sparse integration signals discovered during the audit process.

**Production Readiness:**
The project has a medium production readiness score, indicating that it can be useful for prototypes or internal workflows after dependency and maintenance checks.

Before adopting

Review the current source documentation, licensing terms, dependencies, and maintenance status against your intended use. [View the source](https://github.com/Wasserpuncher/readme-check).

Use in a workflow

Show HN: I audited my own eight repos. Half of them lied in the README may be useful when its README and activity match a concrete workflow.

Limitations and review notes

Medium: useful for prototypes or internal workflows, with dependency and maintenance checks before production.