# microsoft/lage — health index 70/100 (Good)

> Inspection of the public repository microsoft/lage by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 70 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/microsoft/lage
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/microsoft/lage
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/microsoft/lage/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/m/microsoft/lage.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-21
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.16.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 55/100 | Moderate |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 71/100 | Good |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 70/100 | Good |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 82/100 | Good |
| Security | 16% | 76/100 | Good |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 88/100 | Excellent |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Task runner in JS monorepos |
| Homepage | https://microsoft.github.io/lage |
| Primary language | TypeScript |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 815 |
| Forks | 87 |
| Created | 2020-05-18 |
| Last push | 2026-07-20 |
| Commits (last year) | 357 |
| Bus factor | 2 |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | @lage-run/cli | 0.36.12 | 5,587 |
| npm | @lage-run/rpc | 1.4.6 | 4,497 |
| npm | lage | 2.15.17 | 64,734 |
| npm | @lage-run/cache | 1.6.5 | 10,123 |
| npm | @lage-run/config | 0.9.15 | 13,826 |
| npm | @lage-run/hasher | 1.10.11 | 5,395 |
| npm | @lage-run/logger | 1.5.0 | 16,013 |
| npm | @lage-run/grapher | 0.2.30 | 558 |

## Vitality — 55/100 (Moderate)

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

### Development activity — 91/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 27 / 36 | 39/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 357 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 — 1/100 (Critical)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | not met | 0 / 27 | no releases published |
| Release recency | not met | 0 / 36 | no releases |
| Release cadence | not met | 0 / 27 | no releases |
| 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 — 71/100 (Good)

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

### Popularity & adoption — 67/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 47.2 / 60 | 815 stars |
| Forks | partial | 16.1 / 25 | 87 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 3.9 / 15 | 6 watchers |

### Community health — 65/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 85/100 (Excellent)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 67.8 / 80 | 120,733 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 70/100 (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) — 61/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 25.2 / 54 | 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 11.9 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 47% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 67 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 13 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 47/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 14.6 / 46.8 | 31% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 31.2 / 38.2 | 804/987 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 1.5 / 15 | Found 2/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 80/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | met | 25 / 25 | 125,493 followers of microsoft |
| Track record | met | 25 / 25 | 8207 public repos, account ~12 yr old |

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 8 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 11 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 331 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 82/100 (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 | 6 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | .eslintrc.js, eslint.config.js |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 80/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://microsoft.github.io/lage |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 76/100 (Good)

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 — 70/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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 | 3 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 23 out of 23 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 | partial | 0.8 / 7.5 | Found 2/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 13 contributing companies or organizations |
| 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 | met | 2.5 / 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 | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 4.5 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9 |
| SAST | met | 5 / 5 | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| Security-Policy | met | 5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | partial | 6.8 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 55 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 100/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:lage@2.15.17 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | met | 35 / 35 | no direct dependency carries a known advisory |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | met | 25 / 25 | no indirect dependency carries a known advisory |
| No advisories left outstanding | excluded | 0 / 40 | no advisory carries a publication date |

### 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 — 88/100 (Excellent)

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 — 100/100 (Excellent)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | met | 15 / 15 | llms.txt present |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 77/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. 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 | .eslintrc.js, eslint.config.js |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | docs/tsconfig.json, packages/backfill-cache/tsconfig.json, packages/backfill-config/tsconfig.json, packages/backfill-hasher/tsconfig.json, packages/backfill-logger/tsconfig.json, packages/backfill/tsconfig.json, packages/cache-github-actions/tsconfig.json, packages/cache/tsconfig.json, packages/cli/tsconfig.json, packages/config/tsconfig.json, packages/e2e-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/grapher/tsconfig.json, packages/hasher/tsconfig.json, packages/lage/tsconfig.json, packages/logger/tsconfig.json, packages/normalized-tmpdir/tsconfig.json, packages/reporters/tsconfig.json, packages/rpc/tsconfig.json, packages/runners/tsconfig.json, packages/scheduler-types/tsconfig.json, packages/scheduler/tsconfig.json, packages/target-graph/tsconfig.json, packages/test-utilities/tsconfig.json, packages/worker-threads-pool/tsconfig.json, packages/workspace-tools/tsconfig.json, scripts/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | excluded | 0 / 8 | no data |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 9 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9 |

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | TypeScript (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.9 / 55 | 1/523 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 80/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | packages/rpc/proto/lage/v1/lage.proto |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | cookbook |

## Collection warnings

- Resolved dependency list truncated to 2000 of 2106 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