# Tencent/cloudbase-framework — health index 19/100 (Critical)

> Inspection of the public repository Tencent/cloudbase-framework by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 19 out of 100, placing it in the Critical 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/Tencent/cloudbase-framework
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/Tencent/cloudbase-framework
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/Tencent/cloudbase-framework/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/t/Tencent/cloudbase-framework.svg
- Inspected: 2026-09-06
- Methodology: metrics 2.10.0, report schema 0.34.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 21% | 25/100 | At Risk |
| Community & Adoption | 17% | 78/100 | Good |
| Sustainability & Governance | 23% | 61/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 19% | 62/100 | Moderate |
| Security | 16% | 60/100 | Moderate |
| AI Readiness | 4% | 57/100 | Moderate |

The weighted overall 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). Abandonment Policy applies a 40% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it a ceiling of 19.

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | 腾讯云开发云原生一体化部署工具 🚀  CloudBase Framework：一键部署，不限框架语言，云端一体化开发，基于Serverless 架构 |
| Classification | library, network-service |
| Primary language | JavaScript |
| Stars | 1,997 |
| Forks | 188 |
| Created | 2020-04-18 |
| Last push | 2025-08-08 |
| Latest release | v1.6.16 |
| Commits (last year) | 0 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | serverless, fullstack-javascript, tencent, cloudbase, cli, front-end, mobile-development, vue, react, dart, deno, nodejs, php, omi, taro, java, docker, flutter, serverless-architectures |
| Archived | yes — the repository is no longer maintained on GitHub |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | scripts | 0.1.0 | 24,144 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-core | 1.9.7 | 2,033 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-plugin-mp | 1.9.7 | 573 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-plugin-auth | 1.9.7 | 610 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-plugin-dart | 1.9.7 | 483 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-plugin-next | 1.9.7 | 479 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-plugin-node | 1.9.7 | 543 |
| npm | @cloudbase/framework-plugin-nuxt | 1.9.7 | 504 |
| npm | @cloudbase/next-builder | 1.9.7 | 337 |

## Vitality — 25/100 (At Risk)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 21% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 1/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | not met | 0 / 36 | last push 394 days ago |
| Commit cadence | not met | 0 / 36 | 0/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | not met | 0 / 18 | 0 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | not met | 0 / 10 | project is archived |

### Release discipline — 60/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 11 releases published |
| Release recency | not met | 0 / 36 | latest release 2043 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~19.3 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 40/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | partial | 40 / 100 | the repository is archived on GitHub |

## Community & Adoption — 78/100 (Good)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 17% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 81/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 53.5 / 60 | 1,997 stars |
| Forks | partial | 18.9 / 25 | 188 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 9 / 15 | 43 watchers |

### Community health — 86/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | partial | 16.9 / 22.5 | license file present, not a recognized license |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | met | 6.3 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 62/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 49.6 / 80 | 5,225 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 61/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 23% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 36/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 3.1 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 86% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 44 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 5 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 62/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 25.7 / 42 | 61% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 27 / 30 | 142/158 decided PRs merged |
| Newcomer PR acceptance | excluded | 0 / 13 | no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 1.5 / 15 | Found 4/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | met | 25 / 25 | 14,285 followers of Tencent |
| Track record | met | 25 / 25 | 293 public repos, account ~10 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 49/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 8 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | partial | 4 / 35 | latest publish 946 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 132 published versions |
| Not deprecated | not met | 0 / 20 | @cloudbase/framework-core: 【停止维护】CloudBase Framework 相关插件已停止维护（仓库 2026-04 已归档）。  请迁移至以下当前推荐方式： • AI 编程工具集成：CloudBase AI Toolkit (MCP)   https://docs.cloudbase.net/ai/cloudbase-ai-toolkit/getting-started • 命令行部署与管理：CloudBase CLI   https://docs.cloudbase.net/cli-v1/install • 服务端资源管理：@cloudbase/manager-node   https://docs.cloudbase.net/api-reference/manager/node/introduction  详情：https://docs.cloudbase.net/framework/ |

## Engineering Quality — 62/100 (Moderate)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 19% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 5 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | .eslintrc.js |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | not met | 0 / 20 | 0 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |

### 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 | met | 10 / 10 | 19 topics |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 60/100 (Moderate)

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 — 50/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | not met | 0 / 7.5 | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| CI-Tests | not met | 0 / 2.5 | 0 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 0.8 / 7.5 | Found 4/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 5 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | partial | 2.2 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | not met | 0 / 7.5 | project is archived |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | excluded | 0 / 5 | internal error: internal error: invalid Dockerfile |
| SAST | partial | 3.5 / 5 | SAST tool detected but not run on all commits |
| Security-Policy | partial | 2 / 5 | security policy file 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 | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 0 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 100/100 (Exceptional)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 resolved dependencies against OSV; 145 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.

| 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 | excluded | 0 / 25 | transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| No advisories left outstanding | excluded | 0 / 40 | no advisory carries a publication date |

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

| 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 (Exceptional)

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? Carries a deliberately small weight: agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but its absence must never gate the top of the scale (calibration saturates at raw 91, so 100/100 remains reachable with AI Readiness at zero).

### Agent context & guidance — 41/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | met | 15 / 15 | llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.cloudbase.net/llms.txt) |
| Legible commit history | partial | 26.4 / 40 | 48 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 60/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | .eslintrc.js |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | packages/cloudbase-next-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-node-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-nuxt-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-static-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-static-deployer/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbaserc-json-schema/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-core/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-auth/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-container/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-dart/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-database/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-function/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-mp/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-next/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-node/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-nuxt/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-website/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile |
| 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 | excluded | 0 / 10 | internal error: internal error: invalid Dockerfile |

### Code legibility for models — 82/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | partial | 27 / 45 | JavaScript with type-check config (packages/cloudbase-next-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-node-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-nuxt-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-static-builder/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbase-static-deployer/tsconfig.json, packages/cloudbaserc-json-schema/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-core/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-auth/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-container/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-dart/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-database/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-function/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-mp/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-next/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-node/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-nuxt/tsconfig.json, packages/framework-plugin-website/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json) |
| Manageable file sizes | met | 55 / 55 | 0/97 source files over 60KB |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
- npm package 'scripts' points at a different repository (https://github.com/jaredhanson/node-scripts); excluded from ecosystem scoring

## 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