Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 05:23 UTC

AgGateway-ADAPT / ADAPT

Agriculture data interoperability toolkit for .Net

C#EPL-1.0★ 84 stars⑂ 51 forkssince Oct 2015View on GitHub ↗

AgGateway-ADAPT/ADAPT holds a health index of 28 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (68/100) and lowest on Vitality (19/100). It was last updated 837 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

28
overall / 100
At Risk

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

28
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 48 is calibrated to 47 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

AgGateway (ADAPT)Organization
40 followers15 public repossince Oct 2015

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

19Critical · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 837 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push837
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 29 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 940 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~86.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count29
latest_release_tagv3.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release940
mean_days_between_releases86.5

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
31.1/60Stars — 84 stars
14.2/25Forks — 51 forks
8.1/15Watchers — 30 watchers
Inputs used
forks51
stars84
watchers30
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (EPL-1.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 29% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 19 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled19
top_contributor_share0.287
How it's scored
29.3/42Issue resolution — 70% of issues closed
26/30PR acceptance — 214/247 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs214
open_issues30
closed_issues69
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.697
closed_unmerged_prs33
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.6/25Owner reach — 40 followers of AgGateway-ADAPT
20.8/25Track record — 15 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers40
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginAgGateway-ADAPT
public_repos15
account_age_days4,024

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://adaptframework.org/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagriculture-data, csharp, dotnet, interoperability
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://adaptframework.org/
docs_sitehttps://adaptframework.org/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

48Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 10/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages4
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 4 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

37Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.4/40Legible commit history — 42 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.42
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — source/ADAPT/ApplicationDataModel.csproj, source/ApplicationDataModelTest/ApplicationDataModelTest.csproj, source/PluginManager/PluginManager.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestssource/ADAPT/ApplicationDataModel.csproj, source/ApplicationDataModelTest/ApplicationDataModelTest.csproj, source/PluginManager/PluginManager.csproj, source/PluginManagerTest/PluginManagerTest.csproj, source/Representation/Representation.csproj, source/RepresentationTest/RepresentationTest.csproj, source/TestPlugin/TestPlugin.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 2/328 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes88,371
source_files_sampled328
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

84GitHub stars
19contributors
0commits, last 12 months
837days since last push
29releases
2bus factor
30open issues
—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 51 ⇿
0Stars
51Forks
29Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

01020304050605122016-012021-052026-10
Major 2Minor 10Patch 12

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10
3.5aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-10-19 05:23 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 10/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk15.5.0source/ApplicationDataModelTest/ApplicationDataModelTest.csproj
NuGetMoq4.8.1source/ApplicationDataModelTest/ApplicationDataModelTest.csproj
NuGetNUnit3.9.0source/ApplicationDataModelTest/ApplicationDataModelTest.csproj
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter3.9.0source/ApplicationDataModelTest/ApplicationDataModelTest.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk15.5.0source/PluginManagerTest/PluginManagerTest.csproj
NuGetMoq4.8.1source/PluginManagerTest/PluginManagerTest.csproj
NuGetNUnit3.9.0source/PluginManagerTest/PluginManagerTest.csproj
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter3.9.0source/PluginManagerTest/PluginManagerTest.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk15.5.0source/RepresentationTest/RepresentationTest.csproj
NuGetMoq4.8.1source/RepresentationTest/RepresentationTest.csproj
NuGetNUnit3.9.0source/RepresentationTest/RepresentationTest.csproj
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter3.9.0source/RepresentationTest/RepresentationTest.csproj
All dependencies 4

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk15.5.0direct
NuGetMoq4.8.1direct
NuGetNUnit3.9.0direct
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter3.9.0direct
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 4 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.