Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 22:27 UTC

google / or-tools

Google's Operations Research tools:

C++Apache-2.0★ 13,956 stars⑂ 2,474 forkssince Feb 2015View on GitHub ↗
#combinatorial-optimization#linear-programming#operations-research#optimization#or-tools

google/or-tools holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (96/100) and lowest on Security (60/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

91
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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

GoogleOrganization · verified domain
77,510 followers2,897 public repossince Jan 2012

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?

75Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

79Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 250 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year250
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year25

Release discipline

70Good
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 52 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 227 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~115.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count52
latest_release_tagv9.15
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release227
mean_days_between_releases115.1

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

96Exceptional · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

99Exceptional
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 13,956 stars
25/25Forks — 2,474 forks
13.8/15Watchers — 310 watchers
Inputs used
forks2,474
stars13,956
watchers310
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_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

78Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

56Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 48% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.48

Issue & PR responsiveness

84Excellent
How it's scored
40.8/42Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
22/30PR acceptance — 636/868 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs636
open_issues92
closed_issues3,145
prs_merged_7d9
prs_decided_7d14
prs_merged_30d18
prs_decided_30d24
issue_closed_ratio0.972
closed_unmerged_prs232
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3

Ownership & stewardship

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 77,510 followers of google
25/25Track record — 2,897 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers77,510
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logingoogle
public_repos2,897
account_age_days5,335

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

80Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 34 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .pylintrc
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://developers.google.com/optimization/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscombinatorial-optimization, linear-programming, operations-research, optimization, or-tools
has_wikino
homepagehttps://developers.google.com/optimization/
docs_sitehttps://developers.google.com/optimization/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

50Moderate
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
25/25Dependency lockfiles — go.sum
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfilesgo.sum
manifestsgo.mod
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories91
affected_packages13
assessed_packages114
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 6, moderate 4, low 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 114 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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.

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.

75Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

33At Risk
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32.7/40Legible commit history — 60 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.612
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

89Excellent
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, bazel/Makefile, cmake/Makefile, makefiles/Makefile, ortools/flatzinc/challenge/Makefile, tools/docker/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .pylintrc
11/11Static type checking — C++ (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile, bazel/Makefile, cmake/Makefile, makefiles/Makefile, ortools/flatzinc/challenge/Makefile, tools/docker/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestscmake/samples/dotnet/Google.Sample.csproj, cmake/samples/java/pom.xml, go.mod, ortools/dotnet/CreateSigningKey/CreateSigningKey.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02

Code legibility for models

98Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
53/55Manageable file sizes — 88/2,443 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes583,168
source_files_sampled2,443
oversized_source_files88

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — ortools/bop/bop_parameters.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/assignment.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/demon_profiler.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_enums.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_heuristic_parameters.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_ils.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_parameters.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/search_limit.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/search_stats.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/solver_parameters.proto, ortools/glop/parameters.proto, ortools/graph/flow_problem.proto, ortools/linear_solver/linear_solver.proto, ortools/math_opt/callback.proto, ortools/math_opt/cpp/enums_test.proto, ortools/math_opt/infeasible_subsystem.proto, ortools/math_opt/model.proto, ortools/math_opt/model_parameters.proto, ortools/math_opt/model_update.proto, ortools/math_opt/parameters.proto, ortools/math_opt/result.proto, ortools/math_opt/rpc.proto, ortools/math_opt/solution.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/glpk.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/gscip/gscip.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/gurobi.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/highs.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/osqp.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/xpress.proto, ortools/math_opt/sparse_containers.proto, ortools/packing/multiple_dimensions_bin_packing.proto, ortools/packing/vector_bin_packing.proto, ortools/pdlp/solve_log.proto, ortools/pdlp/solvers.proto, ortools/routing/parsers/capacity_planning.proto, ortools/sat/boolean_problem.proto, ortools/sat/cp_model.proto, ortools/sat/cp_model_service.proto, ortools/sat/lrat.proto, ortools/sat/routes_support_graph.proto, ortools/sat/sat_parameters.proto, ortools/scheduling/course_scheduling.proto, ortools/scheduling/jobshop_scheduling.proto, ortools/scheduling/rcpsp.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/model.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/model_parameters.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/parameters.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/result.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/solution.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/solver_resources.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/sparse_containers.proto, ortools/service/v1/optimization.proto, ortools/set_cover/capacity.proto, ortools/set_cover/set_cover.proto, ortools/util/int128.proto, ortools/util/optional_boolean.proto
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples, notebooks, samples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks, samples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesortools/bop/bop_parameters.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/assignment.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/demon_profiler.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_enums.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_heuristic_parameters.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_ils.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/routing_parameters.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/search_limit.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/search_stats.proto, ortools/constraint_solver/solver_parameters.proto, ortools/glop/parameters.proto, ortools/graph/flow_problem.proto, ortools/linear_solver/linear_solver.proto, ortools/math_opt/callback.proto, ortools/math_opt/cpp/enums_test.proto, ortools/math_opt/infeasible_subsystem.proto, ortools/math_opt/model.proto, ortools/math_opt/model_parameters.proto, ortools/math_opt/model_update.proto, ortools/math_opt/parameters.proto, ortools/math_opt/result.proto, ortools/math_opt/rpc.proto, ortools/math_opt/solution.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/glpk.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/gscip/gscip.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/gurobi.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/highs.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/osqp.proto, ortools/math_opt/solvers/xpress.proto, ortools/math_opt/sparse_containers.proto, ortools/packing/multiple_dimensions_bin_packing.proto, ortools/packing/vector_bin_packing.proto, ortools/pdlp/solve_log.proto, ortools/pdlp/solvers.proto, ortools/routing/parsers/capacity_planning.proto, ortools/sat/boolean_problem.proto, ortools/sat/cp_model.proto, ortools/sat/cp_model_service.proto, ortools/sat/lrat.proto, ortools/sat/routes_support_graph.proto, ortools/sat/sat_parameters.proto, ortools/scheduling/course_scheduling.proto, ortools/scheduling/jobshop_scheduling.proto, ortools/scheduling/rcpsp.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/model.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/model_parameters.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/parameters.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/result.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/solution.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/solver_resources.proto, ortools/service/v1/mathopt/sparse_containers.proto, ortools/service/v1/optimization.proto, ortools/set_cover/capacity.proto, ortools/set_cover/set_cover.proto, ortools/util/int128.proto, ortools/util/optional_boolean.proto
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

13,956GitHub stars
99contributors
250commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
52releases
2bus factor
92open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/google/or-tools' from its registry
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2,474 ⇿
0Stars
2,474Forks
14Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

1,0001,5002,0002,5002,47492021-112024-042026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 5 days.

Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/golang/glogv1.2.4go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.5go.mod
All dependencies 116

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 114 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/golang/glogv1.2.4direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.5direct
Mavenjunit:junit—indirect
NuGetGoogle.OrTools—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.1.0indirect
NuGetMMMMPROTOBUF_TAGindirect
NuGetMMMMVVVVindirect
NuGetxunit2.4.1indirect
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio2.4.3indirect
PyPIabsl-py2.3.1indirect
PyPIanyio4.13.0indirect
PyPIargon2-cffi25.1.0indirect
PyPIargon2-cffi-bindings25.1.0indirect
PyPIarrow1.4.0indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.1indirect
PyPIasync-lru2.3.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.14.3indirect
PyPIbleach6.3.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.20indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfastjsonschema2.21.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.25.2indirect
PyPIfqdn1.5.1indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimmutabledict4.2.2indirect
PyPIipykernel7.2.0indirect
PyPIipython9.12.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIisoduration20.11.0indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjson50.14.0indirect
PyPIjsonpointer3.1.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.23.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.8.0indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-events0.12.0indirect
PyPIjupyter-lsp2.3.0indirect
PyPIjupyter-server2.17.0indirect
PyPIjupyter-server-terminals0.5.4indirect
PyPIjupyterlab4.4.8indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-pygments0.3.0indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-server2.28.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.1indirect
PyPImistune3.2.0indirect
PyPImypy1.6.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImypy-protobuf3.5.0indirect
PyPInbclient0.10.4indirect
PyPInbconvert7.17.0indirect
PyPInbformat5.10.4indirect
PyPInest-asyncio1.6.0indirect
PyPInotebook7.4.2indirect
PyPInotebook-shim0.2.4indirect
PyPInumpy2.3.5indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpandas2.3.3indirect
PyPIpandocfilters1.5.1indirect
PyPIparso0.8.6indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.9.4indirect
PyPIplotly5.15.0indirect
PyPIprometheus-client0.24.1indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIprotobuf6.32.0indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-json-logger4.1.0indirect
PyPIpytz2026.1.post1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.1.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.33.0indirect
PyPIrfc3339-validator0.1.4indirect
PyPIrfc3986-validator0.1.1indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIscipy1.16.3indirect
PyPIsend2trash2.1.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.3indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIsvgwrite1.4.3indirect
PyPItenacity9.1.4indirect
PyPIterminado0.18.1indirect
PyPItinycss21.4.0indirect
PyPItornado6.5.5indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItypes-protobuf6.32.1.20260221indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItzdata2025.3indirect
PyPIuri-template1.3.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.36.1indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.6.0indirect
PyPIwebcolors25.10.0indirect
PyPIwebencodings0.5.1indirect
PyPIwebsocket-client1.9.0indirect
Dependency advisories 13

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 114 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 13 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
jupyterlab4.4.8indirectcritical137.5.6
notebook7.4.2indirectcritical47.5.6
jupyter-server2.17.0indirecthigh122.20.0
mistune3.2.0indirecthigh323.3.0
protobuf6.32.0indirecthigh26.33.5
soupsieve2.8.3indirecthigh42.8.4
tornado6.5.5indirecthigh76.5.7
urllib32.6.3indirecthigh42.7.0
bleach6.3.0indirectmoderate36.4.0
idna3.11indirectmoderate23.15
nbconvert7.17.0indirectmoderate47.17.1
setuptools82.0.1indirectmoderate283.0.0
pygments2.19.1indirectlow22.20.0

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

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 google/or-tools. Read them side by side →

95coin-or/pulpA python Linear Programming APIExceptional45MatProGo-dev/MatProInterface.goA common interface used for modeling Mathematical Programs (e.g., Convex Optimization problems) in the language Go (Golang).Weak92Pyomo/pyomoAn object-oriented algebraic modeling language in Python for structured optimization problems.Excellent92davidusb-geek/emhassemhass: Energy Management for Home Assistant, is a Python module designed to optimize your home energy interfacing with Home Assistant.Excellent86flixOpt/flixoptVector based Energy Optimization FrameworkExcellent84multi-objective/moocoreCore Mathematical Functions for Multi-Objective OptimizationExcellent

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.