Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-30 09:32 UTC

SkylineCommunications / Skyline.DataMiner.CICD.CSharpAnalysis

Library containing common functionality for C# code analysis using the .NET Compiler Platform APIs (Roslyn).

C# · PowerShellNo license detected★ 0 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Sep 2023View on GitHub ↗

SkylineCommunications/Skyline.DataMiner.CICD.CSharpAnalysis holds a health index of 50 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (68/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Moderate

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.

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)

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 50 is calibrated to 50 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Skyline CommunicationsOrganization

184 followers475 public repossince Oct 2021

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
NuGet	Skyline.DataMiner.CICD.CSharpAnalysis.Analyzer	2.2.0	-	4	0 days ago	skyline dataminer analyzer

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

68Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

52Moderate

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36	Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
9.4/18	Commit volume — 10 commits in the last year
1/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

commits_last_year	10
human_commit_share	0.551
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	8

Release discipline

92Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 15 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~83 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	15
latest_release_tag	2.2.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	0
mean_days_between_releases	83

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?

24At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical

How it's scored

0/60	Stars — 0 stars
0/25	Forks — 2 forks
0/15	Watchers — 0 watchers

Inputs used

forks	2
stars	0
watchers	0
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

25At Risk

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
0/22.5	License — no license file detected
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	no
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

58Moderate

How it's scored

46.7/80	Total downloads — 31,066 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	Skyline.DataMiner.CICD.CSharpAnalysis.Analyzer
dependents	—
ecosystems	nuget
total_downloads	31,066
monthly_downloads	—
unverified_packages_excluded	—

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

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

28At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.7/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 70% of commits
6.8/13.5	Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	5
top_contributor_share	0.703

Issue & PR responsiveness

63Moderate

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — no issues or no data
20.8/30	PR acceptance — 45/65 decided PRs merged
13/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2

Inputs used

merged_prs	45
open_issues	0
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	2
prs_decided_7d	2
prs_merged_30d	2
prs_decided_30d	2
issue_closed_ratio	—
closed_unmerged_prs	20
first_time_authors_30d	2
first_time_prs_merged_30d	2
first_time_prs_decided_30d	2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

69Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
16.3/25	Owner reach — 184 followers of SkylineCommunications
22.9/25	Track record — 475 public repos, account ~4 yr old

Inputs used

followers	184
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	SkylineCommunications
public_repos	475
account_age_days	1,811

Package maintenance

92Excellent

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on nuget
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
12/20	Version history — 4 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	Skyline.DataMiner.CICD.CSharpAnalysis.Analyzer
ecosystems	nuget
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

39Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

38Weak

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
0/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4	.editorconfig
8/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	no
has_editorconfig	yes
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

40Weak

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

45Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1/2.5	CI-Tests — 8 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5	Code-Review — Found 5/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
1.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5	License — license file not detected
0.8/7.5	Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
2/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	4.5

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

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	17
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 17 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.

41Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

22At Risk

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.5/40	Legible commit history — 16 of 38 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.421
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

34At Risk

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Analyzer/Analyzer.CodeFixes/Analyzer.CodeFixes.csproj, Analyzer/Analyzer.Package/Analyzer.Package.csproj, Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
0/10	Reproducible environment
2.9/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 69 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8	Automated maintenance — 31 of the last 69 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	no
lockfiles	—
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.014
toolchain_manifests	Analyzer/Analyzer.CodeFixes/Analyzer.CodeFixes.csproj, Analyzer/Analyzer.Package/Analyzer.Package.csproj, Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj, Analyzer/Analyzer/Analyzer.csproj, Common/Common.csproj, CommonTests/CommonTests.csproj, Protocol/Protocol.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.449

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/40 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	C#
largest_source_bytes	40,446
source_files_sampled	40
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

0GitHub stars

5contributors

10commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

15releases

1bus factor

0open issues

NuGetpackage ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿

0Stars

2Forks

1Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 0Patch 1

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10

4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-30 09:31 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
3	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
4	CI-Tests	8 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2	Code-Review	Found 5/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
6	Contributors	project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
0	License	license file not detected
1	Maintained	2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 18

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Scripting	`4.14.0`	Common/Common.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces	`4.14.0`	Common/Common.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Scripting	`5.0.0`	Common/Common.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces	`5.0.0`	Common/Common.csproj
NuGet	MSTest	`3.9.2`	CommonTests/CommonTests.csproj
NuGet	coverlet.collector	`6.0.4`	CommonTests/CommonTests.csproj
NuGet	Moq	`4.20.72`	CommonTests/CommonTests.csproj
NuGet	FluentAssertions	`7.2.0`	CommonTests/CommonTests.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces	`4.14.0`	Analyzer/Analyzer.CodeFixes/Analyzer.CodeFixes.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`18.0.1`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis	`4.14.0`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Analyzer.Testing	`1.1.3`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.CodeFix.Testing	`1.1.3`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.CodeRefactoring.Testing	`1.1.3`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	xunit.runner.visualstudio	`3.1.5`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	xunit.v3	`3.2.2`	Analyzer/Analyzer.Test/Analyzer.Test.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers	`3.11.0`	Analyzer/Analyzer/Analyzer.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp	`4.14.0`	Analyzer/Analyzer/Analyzer.csproj

All dependencies 17

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 17 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
NuGet	coverlet.collector	`6.0.4`	direct
NuGet	FluentAssertions	`7.2.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis	`4.14.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers	`3.11.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp	`4.14.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Analyzer.Testing	`1.1.3`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.CodeFix.Testing	`1.1.3`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.CodeRefactoring.Testing	`1.1.3`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Scripting	`4.14.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Scripting	`5.0.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces	`4.14.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces	`5.0.0`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`18.0.1`	direct
NuGet	Moq	`4.20.72`	direct
NuGet	MSTest	`3.9.2`	direct
NuGet	xunit.runner.visualstudio	`3.1.5`	direct
NuGet	xunit.v3	`3.2.2`	direct

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 17 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.

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 — NuGet.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

More detail

Feedback

Related records