Public record
Software health reportschema 0.13.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 15:54 UTC

bufbuild / buf-action

Build, format, lint, and check for breaking changes in your Protobuf schemas, and automatically publish to the Buf Schema Registry.

TypeScriptApache-2.0★ 58 stars⑂ 11 forkssince May 2024View on GitHub ↗
#buf#buf-schema-registry#grpc#protobuf#protocol-buffers

bufbuild/buf-action holds a health index of 62 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (67/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (45/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

62
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.

62
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 58 is calibrated to 62 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

BufOrganization
779 followers77 public repossince Aug 2019

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?

66Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

56Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
11.3/18Commit volume — 17 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year17
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year7

Release discipline

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 21 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 127 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~57.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tagv1.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release127
mean_days_between_releases57.7
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?

45Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

40Weak
How it's scored
28.5/60Stars — 58 stars
8.3/25Forks — 11 forks
3.3/15Watchers — 5 watchers
Inputs used
forks11
stars58
watchers5
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
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?

67Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

35Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 78% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 8 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.776

Issue & PR responsiveness

76Good
How it's scored
37.3/42Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
14.1/30PR acceptance — 116/246 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs116
open_issues3
closed_issues24
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.889
closed_unmerged_prs130
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.

Ownership & stewardship

95Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
20.8/25Owner reach — 779 followers of bufbuild
25/25Track record — 77 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers779
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginbufbuild
public_repos77
account_age_days2,527
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

58Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

54Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.mjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 23 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://buf.build
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbuf, buf-schema-registry, grpc, protobuf, protocol-buffers
has_wikino
homepagehttps://buf.build
docs_sitehttps://buf.build
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

47Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 23 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
3/7.5Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
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 — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

55Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

61Moderate
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.mjs
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/8 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes15,491
source_files_sampled8
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

58GitHub stars
8contributors
17commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
21releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch npm package 'buf-action' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 15:53 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
7CI-Tests23 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@actions/core^3.0.1package.json
npm@actions/exec^3.0.0package.json
npm@actions/github^9.0.0package.json
npm@actions/io^3.0.2package.json
npm@actions/tool-cache^4.0.0package.json
npm@buf/bufbuild_registry.bufbuild_es^2.2.3-20250116203702-1c024d64352b.1package.json
npm@bufbuild/protobuf^2.2.5package.json
npm@connectrpc/connect^2.0.1package.json
npm@connectrpc/connect-web^2.0.1package.json
npm@octokit/webhooks-types^7.6.1package.json
npmparse-diff^0.12.0package.json
npmsemver^7.7.2package.json
All dependencies 127

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 115 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@actions/core3.0.1direct
npm@actions/exec3.0.0direct
npm@actions/github9.1.1direct
npm@actions/io3.0.2direct
npm@actions/tool-cache4.0.0direct
npm@buf/bufbuild_registry.bufbuild_es2.2.3-20260713175918-10d915f5b43b.1direct
npm@bufbuild/protobuf2.12.1direct
npm@connectrpc/connect2.1.2direct
npm@connectrpc/connect-web2.1.2direct
npm@octokit/webhooks-types7.6.1direct
npmparse-diff0.12.0direct
npmsemver7.8.5direct
npm@actions/http-client3.0.2indirect
npm@actions/http-client4.0.1indirect
npm@buf/bufbuild_bufplugin.bufbuild_es2.2.3-20250718181942-e35f9b667443.1indirect
npm@buf/bufbuild_protovalidate.bufbuild_es2.2.3-20250717185734-6c6e0d3c608e.1indirect
npm@bufbuild/license-header0.0.4indirect
npm@eslint-community/eslint-utils4.9.1indirect
npm@eslint-community/regexpp4.12.2indirect
npm@eslint/config-array0.23.5indirect
npm@eslint/config-helpers0.6.0indirect
npm@eslint/core1.2.1indirect
npm@eslint/js10.0.1indirect
npm@eslint/object-schema3.0.5indirect
npm@eslint/plugin-kit0.7.2indirect
npm@humanfs/core0.19.2indirect
npm@humanfs/node0.16.8indirect
npm@humanfs/types0.15.0indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/module-importer1.0.1indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/retry0.4.3indirect
npm@octokit/auth-token6.0.0indirect
npm@octokit/core7.0.6indirect
npm@octokit/endpoint11.0.3indirect
npm@octokit/graphql9.0.3indirect
npm@octokit/openapi-types27.0.0indirect
npm@octokit/plugin-paginate-rest14.0.0indirect
npm@octokit/plugin-rest-endpoint-methods17.0.0indirect
npm@octokit/request10.0.11indirect
npm@octokit/request-error7.1.0indirect
npm@octokit/types16.0.0indirect
npm@types/esrecurse4.3.1indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.9indirect
npm@types/json-schema7.0.15indirect
npm@types/node24.13.3indirect
npm@types/semver7.7.1indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/project-service8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/scope-manager8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/tsconfig-utils8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/type-utils8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/types8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/typescript-estree8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/utils8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/visitor-keys8.64.0indirect
npm@vercel/ncc0.44.1indirect
npmacorn8.17.0indirect
npmacorn-jsx5.3.2indirect
npmajv6.15.0indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbefore-after-hook4.0.0indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.7indirect
npmcontent-type2.0.0indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdeep-is0.1.4indirect
npmescape-string-regexp4.0.0indirect
npmeslint10.7.0indirect
npmeslint-scope9.1.2indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys3.4.3indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys5.0.1indirect
npmespree11.2.0indirect
npmesquery1.7.0indirect
npmesrecurse4.3.0indirect
npmestraverse5.3.0indirect
npmesutils2.0.3indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-json-stable-stringify2.1.0indirect
npmfast-levenshtein2.0.6indirect
npmfdir6.5.0indirect
npmfile-entry-cache8.0.0indirect
npmfind-up5.0.0indirect
npmflat-cache4.0.1indirect
npmflatted3.4.2indirect
npmglob-parent6.0.2indirect
npmglobals17.7.0indirect
npmignore5.3.2indirect
npmignore7.0.6indirect
npmimurmurhash0.1.4indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmjson-buffer3.0.1indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse0.4.1indirect
npmjson-stable-stringify-without-jsonify1.0.1indirect
npmjson-with-bigint3.5.10indirect
npmkeyv4.5.4indirect
npmlevn0.4.1indirect
npmlocate-path6.0.0indirect
npmminimatch10.2.5indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnatural-compare1.4.0indirect
npmoptionator0.9.4indirect
npmp-limit3.1.0indirect
npmp-locate5.0.0indirect
npmpath-exists4.0.0indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmpicomatch2.3.2indirect
npmpicomatch4.0.5indirect
npmprelude-ls1.2.1indirect
npmprettier3.8.1indirect
npmpunycode2.3.1indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.17indirect
npmts-api-utils2.5.0indirect
npmtunnel0.0.6indirect
npmtype-check0.4.0indirect
npmtypescript6.0.3indirect
npmtypescript-eslint8.64.0indirect
npmundici6.27.0indirect
npmundici-types7.18.2indirect
npmuniversal-user-agent7.0.3indirect
npmuri-js4.4.1indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmword-wrap1.2.5indirect
npmyocto-queue0.1.0indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with bufbuild/buf-action. Read them side by side →

94bufbuild/bufThe best way of working with Protocol Buffers.Exceptional69brefwiz/api-bonesOpinionated REST API types: errors (RFC 9457), pagination, health checks, and more. No HTTP client, no business logic — just types.Good63tuihub/protosProtocol buffers definition for TuiHub, import as a library rather than a directoryModerate62sudorandom/protodocsProtobuf documentation that actually looks goodModerate96connectrpc/connect-pyThe Python implementation of Connect: Protobuf RPC that works.Exceptional93connectrpc/connect-pythonThe Python implementation of Connect: Protobuf RPC that works.Exceptional

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 v0.13.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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