Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 09:34 UTC

newrelic / newrelic-ruby-agent

New Relic RPM Ruby Agent

RubyApache-2.0★ 1,209 stars⑂ 608 forkssince Oct 2008View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined

newrelic/newrelic-ruby-agent holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (100/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (67/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 5 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

98
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 88 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

New RelicOrganization
1,008 followers593 public repossince Oct 2008

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsnewrelic_rpm10.7.1-30924 days ago
RubyGemsnewrelic-infinite_tracing10.7.1-7124 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

100Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
36/36Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 1,419 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,419
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year52

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~16.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag10.8.0-pre
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases16.3
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?

90Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
50/60Stars — 1,209 stars
23.2/25Forks — 608 forks
8.9/15Watchers — 41 watchers
Inputs used
forks608
stars1,209
watchers41
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_badges1
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Total downloads — 189,061,953 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesnewrelic_rpm, newrelic-infinite_tracing
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads189,061,953
monthly_downloads—
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

89Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
45.9/54Bus factor — 5 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 14% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 31 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor5
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.14
How it's scored
39.6/42Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
23.6/30PR acceptance — 1,783/2,264 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs1,783
open_issues78
closed_issues1,306
prs_merged_7d8
prs_decided_7d8
prs_merged_30d26
prs_decided_30d27
issue_closed_ratio0.944
closed_unmerged_prs481
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
21.6/25Owner reach — 1,008 followers of newrelic
25/25Track record — 593 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,008
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginnewrelic
public_repos593
account_age_days6,528

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 24 days ago
20/20Version history — 309 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnewrelic_rpm, newrelic-infinite_tracing
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish24

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 19 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc.json, .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.newrelic.com/docs/apm/agents/ruby-agent/getting-started/introduction-new-relic-ruby/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent, ruby, apm-agent, hacktoberfest
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.newrelic.com/docs/apm/agents/ruby-agent/getting-started/introduction-new-relic-ruby/
docs_sitehttps://docs.newrelic.com/docs/apm/agents/ruby-agent/getting-started/introduction-new-relic-ruby/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

82Excellent · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 31 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
4/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages14
unassessed_packages71
affected_by_severitymoderate 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 14 resolved dependencies against OSV. 71 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.

67Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
19.9/40Legible commit history — 37 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.374
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,329
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc.json, .rubocop.yml
11/11Static type checking — .github/actions/simplecov-report/tsconfig.json, .github/actions/variable-mapper/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs.github/actions/simplecov-report/tsconfig.json, .github/actions/variable-mapper/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Ruby with type-check config (.github/actions/simplecov-report/tsconfig.json, .github/actions/variable-mapper/tsconfig.json)
54.9/55Manageable file sizes — 3/1,295 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes886,362
source_files_sampled1,295
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — infinite_tracing/lib/proto/infinite_tracing.proto
0/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesinfinite_tracing/lib/proto/infinite_tracing.proto
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

1,209GitHub stars
98contributors
1,419commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
100releases
5bus factor
78open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 608 ⇿
0Stars
608Forks
97Releases

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.

0100200300400500600587102009-012017-112026-08
Major 2Minor 35Patch 10

Each point covers 17 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.8 / 10
7.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 09:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 31 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 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 85

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 85 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@actions/core1.11.1indirect
npm@actions/core^1.10.0indirect
npm@actions/core^1.9.0indirect
npm@actions/exec1.1.1indirect
npm@actions/github^5.0.0indirect
npm@actions/github^5.1.1indirect
npm@actions/http-client2.0.1indirect
npm@actions/io1.0.2indirect
npm@aki77/actions-replace-comment^0.5.0indirect
npm@eslint/create-config^0.4.5indirect
npm@octokit/graphql^5.0.6indirect
npm@types/jest^27.0.2indirect
npm@types/jest^29.2.0indirect
npm@types/markdown-table^3.0.0indirect
npm@types/node^12.12.38indirect
npm@types/node^18.11.3indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^5.16.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^5.40.1indirect
npm@vercel/ncc0.27.0indirect
npm@vercel/ncc^0.34.0indirect
npm@vercel/ncc^0.36.1indirect
npm@zeit/ncc^0.22.3indirect
npmajv^8.11.0indirect
npmeslint^9.26.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-github^4.1.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-github^4.4.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-jest^26.1.3indirect
npmeslint-plugin-jest^27.1.3indirect
npmeslint-plugin-prettier^4.0.0indirect
npmjest^27.2.2indirect
npmjest^29.2.1indirect
npmjest-circus^27.2.2indirect
npmjest-circus^29.2.1indirect
npmjs-yaml^4.1.0indirect
npmmarkdown-table^3.0.0indirect
npmprettier2.7.1indirect
npmprettier^2.1.2indirect
npmts-jest^27.0.5indirect
npmts-jest^29.0.3indirect
npmtunnel0.0.6indirect
npmtypescript^4.0.3indirect
npmtypescript^4.8.4indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord-jdbcmysql-adapter—indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord-jdbcsqlite3-adapter—indirect
RubyGemsbase64—indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark—indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal—indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal1.4.2indirect
RubyGemsbootsnap—indirect
RubyGemsbundler—indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby—indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-protobuf—indirect
RubyGemsgrpc—indirect
RubyGemsgrpc-tools—indirect
RubyGemsguard—indirect
RubyGemsguard-minitest—indirect
RubyGemsi18n—indirect
RubyGemslisten—indirect
RubyGemslogger—indirect
RubyGemsminitest—indirect
RubyGemsminitest4.7.5indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.2.3indirect
RubyGemsminitest-stub-const—indirect
RubyGemsminitest-stub-const0.6indirect
RubyGemsmocha—indirect
RubyGemsmutex_m—indirect
RubyGemsmysql2—indirect
RubyGemsnewrelic_rpm—indirect
RubyGemsostruct—indirect
RubyGemspuma—indirect
RubyGemsrack—indirect
RubyGemsrack-test—indirect
RubyGemsrails—indirect
RubyGemsrake—indirect
RubyGemsrake10.0.4indirect
RubyGemsrake12.3.3indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify—indirect
RubyGemsredis—indirect
RubyGemssimplecov—indirect
RubyGemssprockets3.7.2indirect
RubyGemssprockets-rails—indirect
RubyGemssqlite3—indirect
RubyGemsstackprof—indirect
RubyGemswarning—indirect
RubyGemsyard—indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 14 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 71 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
rake10.0.4indirectmoderate112.3.3

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 — RubyGems.