Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 10:53 UTC

microsoft / AL

Home of the Dynamics 365 Business Central AL Language extension for Visual Studio Code. Used to track issues regarding the latest version of the AL compiler and developer tools available in the Visual Studio Code Marketplace or as part of the AL Developer Preview builds for Dynamics 365 Business Central.

PowerShell · JavaScriptMIT★ 881 stars⑂ 285 forkssince Nov 2016View on GitHub ↗

microsoft/AL holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Security (93/100) and lowest on Vitality (45/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MicrosoftOrganization · verified domain
129,727 followers8,303 public repossince Dec 2013

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?

45Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 5 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
17.6/18Commit volume90 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year90
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
0/27Ships releasesno releases published
0/36Release recencyno releases
0/27Release cadenceno releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count0
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?

86Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
47.8/60Stars881 stars
20.4/25Forks285 forks
12.2/15Watchers157 watchers
Inputs used
forks285
stars881
watchers157
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

93Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

88Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 39% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth48 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 13 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled48
top_contributor_share0.391
How it's scored
41.3/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
25/30PR acceptance144/173 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs144
open_issues134
closed_issues7,737
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d6
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.983
closed_unmerged_prs29
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach129,727 followers of microsoft
25/25Track record8,303 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers129,727
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginmicrosoft
public_repos8,303
account_age_days4,661

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests6 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsal-language, dynamics-365, visual-studio-code, dynamics-365-business-central, dynamics-365-bc, bcopensource
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

93Exceptional · 16% of overall

Security posture

91Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2/2.5CI-Tests6 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno data
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 13 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
4.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate9.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, CII-Best-Practices, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 1 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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/agents/al-issue-triager/AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.4/40Legible commit history42 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.42
agent_instruction_files.github/agents/al-issue-triager/AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,022
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice23 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.23
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePowerShell without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/5 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePowerShell
largest_source_bytes7,735
source_files_sampled5
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplessamples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
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

881GitHub stars
48contributors
90commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
0releases
3bus factor
134open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'highlightjs-al' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 285 ⇿
0Stars
285Forks

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.

050100150200250300280122016-112021-102026-08

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 9.1 / 10
9.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 10:52 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
8CI-Tests6 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
n/aCII-Best-Practicesinternal error: error during http.Do: Get "https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects.json?url=https://github.com/microsoft/AL": Get "https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects.json?url=https://github.com/microsoft/AL": dial tcp: lookup www.bestpractices.dev on 127.0.0.11:53: server misbehaving
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 13 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
8Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmminimist^1.2.6highlightjs_al/package.json
All dependencies 1

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmminimist1.2.6direct
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

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.