Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-28 08:58 UTC

open-legal-products / mike

OSS Legal AI Platform

TypeScriptAGPL-3.0★ 4,161 stars⑂ 1,296 forkssince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindWeb interfaceNetwork serviceMCP serverhow this is determined

open-legal-products/mike holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (46/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

84
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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

33 followers2 public repossince Jun 2026

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?

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume533 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year533
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year16

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases4 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 41 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv0.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release41
mean_days_between_releases0
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
58.7/60Stars4,161 stars
25/25Forks1,296 forks
9.5/15Watchers52 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,296
stars4,161
watchers52
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (AGPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

46Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 62% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth15 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.62
How it's scored
35.7/42Issue resolution85% of issues closed
12.9/30PR acceptance116/270 decided PRs merged
6.5/13Newcomer PR acceptance8/16 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs116
open_issues14
closed_issues79
prs_merged_7d17
prs_decided_7d24
prs_merged_30d38
prs_decided_30d52
issue_closed_ratio0.849
closed_unmerged_prs154
first_time_authors_30d8
first_time_prs_merged_30d8
first_time_prs_decided_30d16
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11/25Owner reach33 followers of open-legal-products
3.8/25Track record2 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers33
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginopen-legal-products
public_repos2
account_age_days59

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows10 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configeslint.config.mjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests6 out of 6 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

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://mikeoss.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslegal-ai, legal-tech
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://mikeoss.com
docs_sitehttps://mikeoss.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
2.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
2/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities107 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

71Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history97 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.97
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,135
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configeslint.config.mjs
11/11Static type checkingbackend/tsconfig.json, frontend/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json, word-addin/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice23 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsbackend/tsconfig.json, frontend/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json, word-addin/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.23
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
54/55Manageable file sizes12/654 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes171,739
source_files_sampled654
oversized_source_files12
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

4,161GitHub stars
15contributors
533commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
4releases
1bus factor
14open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-21: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 4161 stars today.
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 3,986 ★ / 1,296 ⇿
3,986Stars
1,296Forks
4Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-21. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

01,0002,0003,0004,0003,9861,2961122026-052026-062026-08
Major 0Minor 4Patch 0
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-28 08:57 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 2/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities107 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 88
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@ai-sdk/anthropic^4.0.40backend/package.json
npm@ai-sdk/google^4.0.49backend/package.json
npm@ai-sdk/openai^4.0.45backend/package.json
npm@ai-sdk/openai-compatible^3.0.34backend/package.json
npm@aws-sdk/client-s3^3.787.0backend/package.json
npm@aws-sdk/s3-request-presigner^3.787.0backend/package.json
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk^1.29.0backend/package.json
npm@openrouter/ai-sdk-provider^3.0.0backend/package.json
npm@supabase/ssr^0.12.4backend/package.json
npm@supabase/supabase-js^2.112.3backend/package.json
npmai^7.0.74backend/package.json
npmcors^2.8.5backend/package.json
npmdocx^9.5.0backend/package.json
npmdotenv^17.4.1backend/package.json
npmexpress^4.21.2backend/package.json
npmexpress-rate-limit^8.5.1backend/package.json
npmfast-diff^1.3.0backend/package.json
npmfast-xml-parser^5.7.1backend/package.json
npmhelmet^8.1.0backend/package.json
npmhtml-to-text9.0.5backend/package.json
npmjszip^3.10.1backend/package.json
npmlibreoffice-convert^1.6.0backend/package.json
npmmammoth^1.9.0backend/package.json
npmmulter^1.4.5-lts.2backend/package.json
npmpdfjs-dist^4.10.38backend/package.json
npmresend^4.5.1backend/package.json
npmundici^6.27.0backend/package.json
npmxlsxhttps://cdn.sheetjs.com/xlsx-0.20.3/xlsx-0.20.3.tgzbackend/package.json
npmyaml2.9.0backend/package.json
npmzod^3.25.76backend/package.json
npm@aws-sdk/client-s3^3.1025.0frontend/package.json
npm@aws-sdk/s3-request-presigner^3.1025.0frontend/package.json
npm@daypicker/react^10.0.1frontend/package.json
npm@fortune-sheet/core^1.0.4frontend/package.json
npm@fortune-sheet/react^1.0.4frontend/package.json
npm@opennextjs/cloudflare^1.19.9frontend/package.json
npm@openrouter/sdk^0.3.11frontend/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-dropdown-menu^2.1.16frontend/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-icons^1.3.2frontend/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-popover^1.1.23frontend/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-slot^1.2.4frontend/package.json
npm@tiptap/core^3.22.3frontend/package.json
npm@tiptap/extension-table^3.22.3frontend/package.json
npm@tiptap/pm^3.22.3frontend/package.json
npm@tiptap/react^3.22.3frontend/package.json
npm@tiptap/starter-kit^3.22.3frontend/package.json
npm@types/jsdom^27.0.0frontend/package.json
npm@uiw/react-md-editor^4.1.0frontend/package.json
npmclass-variance-authority^0.7.1frontend/package.json
npmclsx^2.1.1frontend/package.json
npmdocx^9.6.1frontend/package.json
npmdocx-preview^0.3.7frontend/package.json
npmdompurify^3.4.8frontend/package.json
npmexceljs^4.4.0frontend/package.json
npmkatex^0.16.27frontend/package.json
npmlucide-react^0.553.0frontend/package.json
npmluckyexcel^1.0.1frontend/package.json
npmmammoth^1.11.0frontend/package.json
npmmarked^17.0.1frontend/package.json
npmnext^16.2.6frontend/package.json
npmnextjs-toploader^3.9.17frontend/package.json
npmpdfjs-dist4.10.38frontend/package.json
npmreact19.2.0frontend/package.json
npmreact-dom19.2.0frontend/package.json
npmreact-markdown^10.1.0frontend/package.json
npmrecharts^3.7.0frontend/package.json
npmrehype-katex^7.0.1frontend/package.json
npmrehype-raw^7.0.0frontend/package.json
npmremark-gfm^4.0.1frontend/package.json
npmremark-gfm-configurable^1.0.0frontend/package.json
npmremark-math^6.0.0frontend/package.json
npmresend^6.8.0frontend/package.json
npmtailwind-merge^3.4.0frontend/package.json
npmtiptap-markdown^0.9.0frontend/package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-dropdown-menu^2.1.16word-addin/package.json
npm@tiptap/core3.29.2word-addin/package.json
npm@tiptap/extension-table3.29.2word-addin/package.json
npm@tiptap/pm3.29.2word-addin/package.json
npm@tiptap/react3.29.2word-addin/package.json
npm@tiptap/starter-kit3.29.2word-addin/package.json
npmclsx^2.1.1word-addin/package.json
npmlucide-react^0.553.0word-addin/package.json
npmreact^19.2.0word-addin/package.json
npmreact-dom^19.2.0word-addin/package.json
npmreact-markdown^10.1.0word-addin/package.json
npmremark-gfm^4.0.1word-addin/package.json
npmtailwind-merge^3.4.0word-addin/package.json
npmtiptap-markdown^0.9.0word-addin/package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.