Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 19:04 UTC

develmax / Crm.Sdk.Core.Async

C#MIT★ 0 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2021View on GitHub ↗

develmax/Crm.Sdk.Core.Async holds a health index of 23 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Security (54/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (17/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

At Risk

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 29 is calibrated to 23 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

develmaxPersonal account

0 followers20 public repossince Mar 2016

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

24At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

40Weak

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
0/36	Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18	Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
4/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4

Inputs used

commits_last_year	0
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	0

Release discipline

1Critical

How it's scored

0/27	Ships releases — no releases published
0/36	Release recency — no releases
0/27	Release cadence — no releases
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count

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 — 1 forks
0/15	Watchers — 1 watchers

Inputs used

forks	1
stars	0
watchers	1
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
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	yes
readme_badges	1
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

17Critical · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5	Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	1
top_contributor_share	1

Issue & PR responsiveness

1Critical

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30	PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

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

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

Ownership & stewardship

40Weak

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
0/25	Owner reach — 0 followers of develmax
21.6/25	Track record — 20 public repos, account ~10 yr old

Inputs used

followers	0
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	develmax
public_repos	20
account_age_days	3,851

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

34At Risk · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

30At Risk

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
0/6.4	.editorconfig
0/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	no
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

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

Documentation

40Weak

How it's scored

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

Inputs used

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

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

42Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5	CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
3/7.5	Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	4.2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, 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	12
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 12 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.

29At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40	Legible commit history — 0 of 36 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

24At Risk

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Compatibility.Smoke/Compatibility.Smoke.csproj, Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Package/Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Package.csproj, Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Test/Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.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
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 36
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
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
toolchain_manifests	Compatibility.Smoke/Compatibility.Smoke.csproj, Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Package/Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Package.csproj, Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Test/Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Test.csproj, Microsoft.Crm.Core/Microsoft.Crm.Core.csproj, Microsoft.Crm.Sdk.Proxy/Microsoft.Crm.Sdk.Proxy.csproj, Microsoft.Crm.Sdk/Microsoft.Crm.Sdk.csproj, Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData.csproj, Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj, Transport.Tests/Transport.Tests.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
54.9/55	Manageable file sizes — 3/1,718 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	C#
largest_source_bytes	87,527
source_files_sampled	1,718
oversized_source_files	3

Key facts

0GitHub stars

1contributors

0commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

0releases

1bus factor

0open issues

NuGetpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Could not fetch nuget package 'Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk' from its registry
Could not fetch nuget package 'Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10

4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 19:04 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/a	CI-Tests	no pull request found
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0	Contributors	project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
4	Maintained	5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	no SAST tool detected
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 13

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
NuGet	Crm.Sdk.Core	`11.0.1`	Compatibility.Smoke/Compatibility.Smoke.csproj
NuGet	System.ServiceModel.Http	`4.10.0`	Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Test/Crm.Sdk.Core.Async.Test.csproj
NuGet	Newtonsoft.Json	`13.0.3`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData.csproj
NuGet	System.Memory	`4.5.5`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OData.csproj
NuGet	System.Memory	`4.5.5`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj
NuGet	System.Formats.Asn1	`8.0.2`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj
NuGet	System.Security.Cryptography.Pkcs	`8.0.1`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj
NuGet	System.ServiceModel.Http	`4.8.1`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj
NuGet	System.Security.Cryptography.Xml	`4.7.1`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj
NuGet	System.ServiceModel.Http	`4.10.3`	Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk/Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.csproj
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`17.11.1`	Transport.Tests/Transport.Tests.csproj
NuGet	xunit	`2.9.2`	Transport.Tests/Transport.Tests.csproj
NuGet	xunit.runner.visualstudio	`2.8.2`	Transport.Tests/Transport.Tests.csproj

All dependencies 12

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
NuGet	Crm.Sdk.Core	`11.0.1`	direct
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`17.11.1`	direct
NuGet	Newtonsoft.Json	`13.0.3`	direct
NuGet	System.Formats.Asn1	`8.0.2`	direct
NuGet	System.Memory	`4.5.5`	direct
NuGet	System.Security.Cryptography.Pkcs	`8.0.1`	direct
NuGet	System.Security.Cryptography.Xml	`4.7.1`	direct
NuGet	System.ServiceModel.Http	`4.10.0`	direct
NuGet	System.ServiceModel.Http	`4.10.3`	direct
NuGet	System.ServiceModel.Http	`4.8.1`	direct
NuGet	xunit	`2.9.2`	direct
NuGet	xunit.runner.visualstudio	`2.8.2`	direct

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 12 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.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records