# inkeep/agents — health index 76/100 (Good)

> Inspection of the public repository inkeep/agents by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 76 out of 100, placing it in the Good 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/inkeep/agents
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/inkeep/agents
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/inkeep/agents/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/i/inkeep/agents.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-21
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.17.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 94/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 72/100 | Good |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 80/100 | Good |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 76/100 | Good |
| Security | 16% | 48/100 | At risk |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 75/100 | Good |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Create AI Agents in a No-Code Visual Builder or TypeScript SDK with full 2-way sync. For shipping AI assistants and multi-agent AI workflows. |
| Homepage | https://docs.inkeep.com |
| Primary language | TypeScript |
| Stars | 1,307 |
| Forks | 152 |
| Created | 2025-09-05 |
| Last push | 2026-07-20 |
| Latest release | v0.68.4 |
| Commits (last year) | 3,159 |
| Bus factor | 5 |
| Topics | agent, agent-builder, agent-framework, ai-agents, mulit-agent, no-code, workflows, agents-sdk, ai, ai-agent, aiagentframework, developer-sdk, inkeep, llms, low-code, mcp, mcp-server, self-hosted, typescript, workflow |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | @inkeep/agents-api | 0.80.4 | 10,225 |
| npm | @inkeep/agents-cli | 0.80.4 | 14,133 |
| npm | @inkeep/agents-manage-ui | 0.80.4 | 31,463 |

## Vitality — 94/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 96/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 31.8 / 36 | 46/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 3159 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 90/100 (Excellent)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 100 releases published |
| Release recency | partial | 27 / 36 | latest release 96 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~0.6 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | maintenance record not established from the collected data |

## Community & Adoption — 72/100 (Good)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 74/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 50.5 / 60 | 1,307 stars |
| Forks | partial | 18.2 / 25 | 152 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 5.3 / 15 | 10 watchers |

### Community health — 64/100 (Moderate)

| 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 | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 79/100 (Good)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 63.3 / 80 | 55,821 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 80/100 (Good)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 88/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 45.9 / 54 | 5 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 18.4 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 18% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 25 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10 |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 37.7 / 46.8 | 81% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 31.8 / 38.2 | 2823/3398 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | not met | 0 / 15 | Found 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 65/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 14.9 / 25 | 118 followers of inkeep |
| Track record | partial | 20 / 25 | 79 public repos, account ~3 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 3 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 12 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 1565 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 76/100 (Good)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 84/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 13 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | biome.json, eslint.config.mjs |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 65/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://docs.inkeep.com |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 20 topics |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 48/100 (At risk)

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 — 51/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 2.2 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Found 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10 |
| 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 | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 2.5 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not 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 | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 136 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 34/100 (At risk)

Matched the npm:@inkeep/agents-api@0.80.4 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1112 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 10.4 / 35 | 2 affected: @better-auth/oauth-provider 1.6.9 (high 8.1), drizzle-orm 0.44.7 (high 7.5) |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 1.6 / 25 | 14 affected: @better-auth/sso 1.6.9 (critical 9.6), better-auth 1.6.9 (critical 9.1), protobufjs 8.0.0 (critical 9.8), +11 more |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 22.1 / 40 | 4 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 130 days ago |

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

| 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 (Excellent)

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 — 75/100 (Good)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 75/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 71/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. 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 | biome.json, eslint.config.mjs |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | agents-api/tsconfig.json, agents-cli/tsconfig.json, agents-cookbook/evals/langfuse-dataset-example/tsconfig.json, agents-cookbook/tsconfig.json, agents-docs/tsconfig.json, agents-manage-ui/cypress/tsconfig.json, agents-manage-ui/tsconfig.json, agents-ui-demo/tsconfig.json, create-agents-template/apps/agents-api/tsconfig.json, create-agents-template/apps/mcp/tsconfig.json, packages/agents-core/tsconfig.json, packages/agents-email/tsconfig.json, packages/agents-mcp/tsconfig.json, packages/agents-sdk/tsconfig.json, packages/agents-work-apps/tsconfig.json, packages/ai-sdk-provider/tsconfig.json, packages/create-agents/tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | partial | 5 / 8 | dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 5 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5 |

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | TypeScript (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.8 / 55 | 14/3777 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 60/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | agents-api/__snapshots__/openapi.json |
| MCP server | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | not met | 0 / 40 | — |

## Collection warnings

- Resolved dependency list truncated to 2000 of 4003 packages (counts remain complete)

## 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