# HomecareHomebase/azure-bake — health index 55/100 (Moderate)

> Inspection of the public repository HomecareHomebase/azure-bake by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 55 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/HomecareHomebase/azure-bake
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/HomecareHomebase/azure-bake
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/HomecareHomebase/azure-bake/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/h/HomecareHomebase/azure-bake.svg
- Inspected: 2026-08-01
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.27.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 32/100 | At risk |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 47/100 | At risk |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 74/100 | Good |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 70/100 | Good |
| Security | 16% | 46/100 | At risk |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 57/100 | Moderate |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | An Open Source Deployment Management Framework for DevOps and Developers |
| Primary language | TypeScript |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 10 |
| Forks | 20 |
| Created | 2018-11-16 |
| Last push | 2026-07-22 |
| Commits (last year) | 17 |
| Bus factor | 2 |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | @azbake/core | 0.1.108 | 1,827 |
| npm | azure-bake | 0.5.56 | 2,587 |
| npm | @azbake/arm-helper | 0.1.112 | 4,646 |

## Vitality — 32/100 (At risk)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 53/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | partial | 28.8 / 36 | last push 9 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 4.2 / 36 | 6/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | partial | 11.3 / 18 | 17 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | partial | 9 / 10 | 11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9 |

### Release discipline — 1/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | not met | 0 / 27 | no releases published |
| Release recency | not met | 0 / 36 | no releases |
| Release cadence | not met | 0 / 27 | no releases |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | last human commit 9 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 47/100 (At risk)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 32/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 15.5 / 60 | 10 stars |
| Forks | partial | 10.7 / 25 | 20 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 5.3 / 15 | 10 watchers |

### Community health — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 66/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 52.8 / 80 | 9,060 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 74/100 (Good)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 61/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 25.2 / 54 | 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 12 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 46% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 21 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10 |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 76/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 40.1 / 46.8 | 86% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 31.1 / 38.2 | 253/311 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 4.5 / 15 | Found 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 65/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 12.9 / 25 | 61 followers of HomecareHomebase |
| Track record | partial | 22.3 / 25 | 25 public repos, account ~10 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 3 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 9 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 107 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 70/100 (Good)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 84/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 1 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | .eslintrc.yml |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 46/100 (At risk)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 41/100 (At risk)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 3.8 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 2.2 / 7.5 | Found 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10 |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | not met | 0 / 7.5 | no update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | partial | 6.8 / 7.5 | 11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9 |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 111 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 66/100 (Moderate)

Matched the npm:azure-bake@0.5.56 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 75 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | met | 35 / 35 | no direct dependency carries a known advisory |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 5.7 / 25 | 3 affected: axios 0.21.4 (high 8.6), uuid 3.4.0 (high 7.5), uuid 8.3.2 (high 7.5) |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 25.2 / 40 | 3 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 996 days ago |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 57/100 (Moderate)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 40/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 54/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | .eslintrc.yml |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | arm-helper/tsconfig.json, core/tsconfig.json, ingredient-template/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-acs/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-apim-api/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-apim/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-app-insights/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-app-service-plan/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-arm/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-availability-set/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-azure-vm-extension/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-azure-vm/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-batch/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-container-reg/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-cosmosdb/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-databricks/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-datafactoryv2/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-event-hub-namespace/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-event-hub/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-function-app/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-functions/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-host-names/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-key-vault/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-kubernetes/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-metric-alert/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-network-interface/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-null/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-postgresql/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-property-service/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-script/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-search/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-service-bus-namespace/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-service-bus-queue/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-sql-dwh/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-sqldb/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-sqlserver-logical/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-storage/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-traffic-manager/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-utils/tsconfig.json, ingredient/ingredient-webapp-container/tsconfig.json, system/tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | devcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | not met | 0 / 10 | no agent-authored commits among the last 100 |
| Automated maintenance | not met | 0 / 8 | no automated dependency updates observed |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |

### Code legibility for models — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | TypeScript (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | met | 55 / 55 | 0/196 source files over 60KB |

## Collection warnings

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

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt