Public record
Software health reportschema 0.18.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 14:00 UTC

FirelyTeam / firely-cql-sdk

This is NCQA's and Firely's official support SDK for working with CQL (Clinical Query Language) on the Microsoft .NET (dotnet) platform. It contains an engine for executing CQL/ELM, by turning the contents of CQL or ELM files into a .NET assembly so it can be called statically.

C# · CQLBSD-3-Clause★ 43 stars⑂ 23 forkssince Mar 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

FirelyTeam/firely-cql-sdk holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (46/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

84
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FirelyOrganization
108 followers65 public repossince Feb 2014

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?

96Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence42/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume1,592 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,592
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year42

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases32 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~20.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count32
latest_release_tagv2.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases20.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

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

46Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
26.3/60Stars43 stars
11.2/25Forks23 forks
5.3/15Watchers10 watchers
Inputs used
forks23
stars43
watchers10
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
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
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 59% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth29 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled29
top_contributor_share0.592
How it's scored
32.2/42Issue resolution77% of issues closed
23.2/30PR acceptance606/785 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs606
open_issues133
closed_issues436
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.766
closed_unmerged_prs179
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
14.6/25Owner reach108 followers of FirelyTeam
25/25Track record65 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers108
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginFirelyTeam
public_repos65
account_age_days4,547
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://fire.ly/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssdk, cql, fhir, clinical-query-language
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://fire.ly/
docs_sitehttps://fire.ly/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

70Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities18 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate6.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages37
unassessed_packages2
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 37 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

71Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/copilot-instructions.md, CLAUDE.md, Cql/Cql.Abstractions/CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, CLAUDE.md, Cql/Cql.Abstractions/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,770
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC# (statically typed)
50.1/55Manageable file sizes73/820 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes425,929
source_files_sampled820
oversized_source_files73
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexample, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

43GitHub stars
29contributors
1,592commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
32releases
1bus factor
133open issues
package ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 43 ★ / 23 ⇿
43Stars
23Forks

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.

01020304050432162023-092025-012026-04

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-21 13:59 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities18 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 41
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp5.3.0Cql/CodeGeneration.NET/CodeGeneration.NET.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug10.0.3Cql/CodeGeneration.NET/CodeGeneration.NET.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.3Cql/CodeGeneration.NET/CodeGeneration.NET.csproj
NuGetBenchmarkDotNet0.14.0Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetFluentAssertions7.2.0Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.3Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug10.0.3Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.13.0Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetMSTest.TestFramework3.8.3Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetMSTest.TestAdapter3.8.3Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetcoverlet.collector6.0.2Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetHl7.Fhir.R4$(FirelyNetVersion)Cql/CoreTests/CoreTests.csproj
NuGetJetBrains.AnnotationsCql/Cql.Abstractions/Cql.Abstractions.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions10.0.7Cql/Cql.Compiler/Cql.Compiler.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug10.0.3Cql/Cql.Compiler/Cql.Compiler.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration10.0.3Cql/Cql.CqlToElm/Cql.CqlToElm.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection10.0.3Cql/Cql.CqlToElm/Cql.CqlToElm.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.3Cql/Cql.CqlToElm/Cql.CqlToElm.csproj
NuGetHl7.Fhir.Base$(FirelyNetVersion)Cql/Cql.Firely/Cql.Firely.csproj
NuGetHl7.Fhir.R4$(FirelyNetVersion)Cql/Cql.Firely/Cql.Firely.csproj
NuGetAntlr4.Runtime.Standard4.13.1Cql/Cql.Grammar/Cql.Grammar.csproj
NuGetHl7.Fhir.R4$(FirelyNetVersion)Cql/Cql.Packaging/Cql.Packaging.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug10.0.3Cql/Cql.Runtime/Cql.Runtime.csproj
NuGetFhir.Metrics1.3.0Cql/Cql.Runtime/Cql.Runtime.csproj
NuGetFluentAssertions7.2.0Cql/CqlToElmTests/CqlToElmTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.3Cql/CqlToElmTests/CqlToElmTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.13.0Cql/CqlToElmTests/CqlToElmTests.csproj
NuGetMSTest.TestAdapter3.8.3Cql/CqlToElmTests/CqlToElmTests.csproj
NuGetMSTest.TestFramework3.8.3Cql/CqlToElmTests/CqlToElmTests.csproj
NuGetcoverlet.collector6.0.2Cql/CqlToElmTests/CqlToElmTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp5.3.0Cql/Elm/Elm.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Hosting10.0.3Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration10.0.3Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.3Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetSerilog.Extensions.Logging9.0.1Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.File7.0.0Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetHl7.Fhir.R4$(FirelyNetVersion)Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetSystem.CommandLine2.0.0-beta4.22272.1Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetSystem.CommandLine.NamingConventionBinder2.0.0-beta4.22272.1Cql/PackagerCLI/PackagerCLI.csproj
NuGetSystem.CodeDom8.0.0tools/XsdToCSharpConverter/XsdToCSharpConverter.csproj
NuGetMSTest4.0.1tools/XsdToCSharpConverterTests/XsdToCSharpConverterTests.csproj
All dependencies 39

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 29 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetAntlr4.Runtime.Standard4.13.1direct
NuGetBenchmarkDotNet0.14.0direct
NuGetcoverlet.collector3.1.2direct
NuGetcoverlet.collector6.0.2direct
NuGetFhir.Metrics1.3.0direct
NuGetFluentAssertions7.2.0direct
NuGetHl7.Fhir.Basedirect
NuGetHl7.Fhir.R4direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp5.3.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration10.0.3direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection10.0.3direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Hosting10.0.3direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.3direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging8.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions10.0.7direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.3direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug10.0.3direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.13.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.3.2direct
NuGetMSTest4.0.1direct
NuGetMSTest.TestAdapter2.2.10direct
NuGetMSTest.TestAdapter3.8.3direct
NuGetMSTest.TestFramework2.2.10direct
NuGetMSTest.TestFramework3.8.3direct
NuGetSerilog.Extensions.Logging9.0.1direct
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.File7.0.0direct
NuGetSystem.CodeDom8.0.0direct
NuGetSystem.CommandLine2.0.0-beta4.22272.1direct
NuGetSystem.CommandLine.NamingConventionBinder2.0.0-beta4.22272.1direct
Mavenorg.cqframework:cql-to-elm-cli4.0.0indirect
Mavenorg.cqframework:elm-fhir4.0.0indirect
NuGetBenchmarkDotNet.Diagnostics.Windows0.14.0indirect
NuGetCommandLineParser2.9.1indirect
NuGetHl7.Fhir.R4B5.1.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder10.0.3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.CommandLine10.0.3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.FileSystemGlobbing10.0.3indirect
NuGetSystem.Globalization4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Text.Json8.0.5indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 37 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 v0.18.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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