So what have I missed?
The fact that many core modules that you most likely use on a daily basis would set off plenty of red flags.
A few other points I think you should rethink:
- it reinvents wheels, uses globals - sometimes an author doesn't want to depend on existing code (particularly if it's not a core module). Sometimes code is too slow (this matters, see perl if you disagree). There are good reasons for using globals! Strict rules of that sort rarely do anyone but the newest programmer any good.
- or HTML::* - why? There are plenty of exceptionally good modules in that namespace (granted, I think they should almost all be in XHTML nowadays, but close enough).
- The language is uncomfortable with perl terms: we pass in what is known as a "Hash Reference" - possibly a bad sign, but remember not all documentation is written for experts, explaining simple concepts probably doesn't belong in module docs (links would be better), but there's a lot of gray area here.
As for flags to add - how about tests? This is a major one I look for.
Most of all I'd advise you to check the source of modules you deem trustable, if it ends up being no good, take another look at the 'red flag' ones.