# pevey/medusa-plugins — health index 40/100 (At risk)

> Inspection of the public repository pevey/medusa-plugins by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 40 out of 100, placing it in the At risk 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/pevey/medusa-plugins
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/pevey/medusa-plugins
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/pevey/medusa-plugins/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/p/pevey/medusa-plugins.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-22
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.26.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 41/100 | At risk |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 29/100 | Critical |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 59/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 37/100 | At risk |
| Security | 16% | 29/100 | Critical |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 38/100 | At risk |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | A workspace for developing Medusa plugins and the SvelteKit storefront SDK |
| Homepage | https://pevey.com |
| Primary language | TypeScript |
| Stars | 33 |
| Forks | 9 |
| Created | 2023-02-02 |
| Last push | 2026-07-21 |
| Commits (last year) | 128 |
| Bus factor | 1 |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | medusa-plugin-mcp | 0.2.2 | 490 |
| npm | medusa-plugin-forms | 0.2.3 | 721 |
| npm | medusa-plugin-search | 1.0.0 | 674 |
| npm | medusa-plugin-content | 0.2.5 | 2,459 |
| npm | medusa-plugin-r2 | 2.0.1 | 856 |
| npm | medusa-plugin-ratings | 0.2.2 | 506 |

## Vitality — 41/100 (At risk)

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

### Development activity — 68/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 3.5 / 36 | 5/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 128 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 | last human commit 0 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 29/100 (Critical)

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

### Popularity & adoption — 32/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 24.4 / 60 | 33 stars |
| Forks | partial | 7.5 / 25 | 9 forks |
| Watchers | not met | 0 / 15 | 2 watchers |

### Community health — 1/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | not met | 0 / 22.5 | — |
| License | not met | 0 / 22.5 | no license file detected |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 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) — 63/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 50.1 / 80 | 5,706 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 59/100 (Moderate)

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) — 10/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | not met | 0 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 100% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | partial | 1.4 / 13.5 | 1 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | not met | 0 / 10 | project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 85/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | met | 46.8 / 46.8 | 100% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | met | 38.2 / 38.2 | 2/2 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | not met | 0 / 15 | Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 58/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | partial | 10 / 30 | personal (user) account |
| Verified domain | excluded | 0 / 20 | not applicable to user accounts |
| Owner reach | partial | 12.5 / 25 | 54 followers of pevey |
| Track record | partial | 24 / 25 | 43 public repos, account ~12 yr old |

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 6 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 0 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 13 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 37/100 (At risk)

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

### Engineering practices — 38/100 (At risk)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | not met | 0 / 24 | — |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | not met | 0 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | excluded | 0 / 20 | no pull request found |

### Documentation — 35/100 (At risk)

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

## Security — 29/100 (Critical)

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 — 22/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | not met | 0 / 7.5 | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| CI-Tests | excluded | 0 / 2.5 | no pull request found |
| 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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| Contributors | not met | 0 / 2.5 | project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |
| Dangerous-Workflow | excluded | 0 / 10 | no workflows found |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | not met | 0 / 7.5 | no update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | not met | 0 / 2.5 | license file not 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 | excluded | 0 / 5 | no dependencies found |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | no SAST tool detected |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | No tokens found |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 118 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 59/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 2912 resolved dependencies against OSV; 51 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.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 10.2 / 35 | 3 affected: multer 2.1.1 (high 7.5), undici 6.21.1 (high 7.5), undici 6.25.0 (high 7.5) |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | excluded | 0 / 25 | transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 33.7 / 40 | 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 432 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 — 38/100 (At risk)

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 — 1/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | not met | 0 / 40 | 0 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 48/100 (At risk)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | apps/backend/tsconfig.json, apps/docs/tsconfig.json, apps/storefront/tsconfig.json, packages/access/tsconfig.json, packages/affiliates/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/affiliates/tsconfig.json, packages/analytics/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/analytics/tsconfig.json, packages/automation/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/automation/tsconfig.json, packages/barcodes/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/barcodes/tsconfig.json, packages/complaints/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/complaints/tsconfig.json, packages/content/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/content/tsconfig.json, packages/customer-tags/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/customer-tags/tsconfig.json, packages/file-r2/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/file-r2/tsconfig.json, packages/forms/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/forms/tsconfig.json, packages/js-sdk/tsconfig.json, packages/mcp/tsconfig.json, packages/notification-ses/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/notification-ses/tsconfig.json, packages/order-notes/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/order-notes/tsconfig.json, packages/payment-braintree/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/payment-braintree/tsconfig.json, packages/ratings/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/ratings/tsconfig.json, packages/search/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/search/tsconfig.json, packages/statistics/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/statistics/tsconfig.json, packages/tax-lookup/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/tax-lookup/tsconfig.json, packages/tracing/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/tracing/tsconfig.json, packages/veeqo/integration-tests/tsconfig.json, packages/veeqo/tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | not met | 0 / 10 | no agent-authored commits among the last 100 |
| Automated maintenance | not met | 0 / 8 | no automated dependency updates observed |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | excluded | 0 / 10 | no dependencies found |

### 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 | 1/912 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 20/100 (Critical)

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

## Collection warnings

- Could not fetch npm package 'medusa-plugin-access' from its registry
- Could not fetch npm package 'medusa-js-sdk' from its registry
- deps.dev does not index npm:medusa-plugin-mcp@0.2.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

## 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