Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-07-28 13:44 UTC

cel-expr / cel-go

Fast, portable, non-Turing complete expression evaluation with gradual typing (Go)

GoApache-2.0★ 3,042 stars⑂ 307 forkssince Mar 2018View on GitHub ↗

cel-expr/cel-go holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (56/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

89
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.

89
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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

38 followers10 public repossince Oct 2024

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gopoints to another repo — not scoredv0.30.0-863 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
26.3/36Commit cadence — 38/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 113 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year113
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year38

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 72 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~41.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count72
latest_release_tagv0.30.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases41.8
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?

89Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
56.5/60Stars — 3,042 stars
20.7/25Forks — 307 forks
8.6/15Watchers — 36 watchers
Inputs used
forks307
stars3,042
watchers36
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 60% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.604
How it's scored
36.9/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
27.9/30PR acceptance — 866/932 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_prs866
open_issues48
closed_issues348
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.879
closed_unmerged_prs66
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.4/25Owner reach — 38 followers of cel-expr
11.1/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers38
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logincel-expr
public_repos10
account_age_days637

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://cel.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgolang, go, cel, expression, expression-language, expression-evaluator, expression-parser
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://cel.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

80Excellent · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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 11 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
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 — no data
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate7.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, dangerous_workflow, packaging, pinned_dependencies, signed_releases, token_permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: golang.org/x/text v0.22.0 (unknown)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages2
assessed_packages26
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 2
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 26 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.

64Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 94 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.94
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — codelab/go.mod, conformance/go.mod, go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestscodelab/go.mod, conformance/go.mod, go.mod, policy/go.mod, repl/go.mod, tools/go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
53.5/55Manageable file sizes — 8/287 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes249,241
source_files_sampled287
oversized_source_files8
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — cel/testdata/mutant.proto, cel/testdata/team.proto, test/proto2pb/test_all_types.proto, test/proto2pb/test_extensions.proto, test/proto3pb/test_all_types.proto, test/proto3pb/test_import.proto
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filescel/testdata/mutant.proto, cel/testdata/team.proto, test/proto2pb/test_all_types.proto, test/proto2pb/test_extensions.proto, test/proto3pb/test_all_types.proto, test/proto3pb/test_import.proto

Key facts

3,042GitHub stars
99contributors
113commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
72releases
1bus factor
48open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • go package 'github.com/google/cel-go' points at a different repository (https://github.com/google/cel-go); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/google/cel-go/repl' from its registry
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/google/cel-go/tools' from its registry
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/google/cel-go/policy' from its registry
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/google/cel-go/codelab' from its registry
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/google/cel-go/conformance' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 307 ⇿
0Stars
307Forks
71Releases

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.

05010015020025030030072018-032022-052026-07
Major 0Minor 27Patch 38

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.8 / 10
7.8aggregate

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 · 2026-07-28 13:44 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
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 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 11 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 14 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
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 37
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/golang/glogv1.2.4codelab/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gov0.21.0codelab/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20240826202546-f6391c0de4c7codelab/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.34.2codelab/go.mod
Gocel.dev/exprv0.25.1conformance/go.mod
Gogithub.com/bazelbuild/rules_gov0.49.0conformance/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gov0.26.1conformance/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.7.0conformance/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10conformance/go.mod
Gocel.dev/exprv0.25.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/antlr4-go/antlr/v4v4.13.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.7.0go.mod
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20240826202546-f6391c0de4c7go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.22.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gov0.26.1policy/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-go/toolsv0.0.0-20251023215754-a36d461be521policy/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.7.0policy/go.mod
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4policy/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10policy/go.mod
Gocel.dev/exprv0.25.1repl/go.mod
Gogithub.com/antlr4-go/antlr/v4v4.13.1repl/go.mod
Gogithub.com/chzyer/readlinev1.5.1repl/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gov0.26.1repl/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.7.0repl/go.mod
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4repl/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20240826202546-f6391c0de4c7repl/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20240826202546-f6391c0de4c7repl/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10repl/go.mod
Gocel.dev/exprv0.25.1tools/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gov0.22.0tools/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-go/policyv0.0.0-20250311174852-f5ea07b389a1tools/go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.7.0tools/go.mod
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4tools/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20250311190419-81fb87f6b8bftools/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10tools/go.mod
All dependencies 26

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 18 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gocel.dev/expr0.22.1direct
Gocel.dev/exprv0.25.1direct
Gogithub.com/antlr4-go/antlr/v44.13.0direct
Gogithub.com/antlr4-go/antlr/v4v4.13.1direct
Gogithub.com/bazelbuild/rules_go0.49.0direct
Gogithub.com/chzyer/readlinev1.5.1direct
Gogithub.com/golang/glog1.2.4direct
Gogithub.com/google/cel-go0.21.0direct
Gogithub.com/google/cel-go/policy0.0.0-20250311174852-f5ea07b389a1direct
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.7.0direct
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4direct
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.22.0direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20240826202546-f6391c0de4c7direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20250311190419-81fb87f6b8bfdirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20240826202546-f6391c0de4c7direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20250311190419-81fb87f6b8bfdirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobuf1.34.2direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10direct
Go../.0.22.0indirect
Go./..0.26.1indirect
Gogithub.com/stoewer/go-strcase1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/stoewer/go-strcase1.3.1indirect
Gogolang.org/x/exp0.0.0-20230515195305-f3d0a9c9a5ccindirect
Gogolang.org/x/expv0.0.0-20240823005443-9b4947da3948indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.21.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v33.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 26 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/textv0.22.0directunknown10.39.0
golang.org/x/sysv0.21.0indirectunknown10.44.0

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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