actions-gh-pages

GitHub Actions for GitHub Pages 🚀 Deploy static files and publish your site easily. Static-Site-Generators-friendly.

Runs with mockssource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit 09d8f313dcc8

TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: actions, gatsby, github actions, github pages, hugo, mdbook, mkdocs and nextjs.

actions-gh-pages runs, with stand-ins for the services it depends on. An Argusic agent installed it in 15 minutes and hit no errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

The actions-gh-pages GitHub Action repository builds successfully with ncc/esbuild, passes all 53 Jest tests with mocked git operations, and passes TypeScript strict checks and ESLint linting.

What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured

Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 92 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).

At a glance

verdict
Runs with mocks
Argusic Score
92 / 100
cost of the verifying run
$0.01 (measured)
recorded runs
1
last tested
stars
5,368
forks
449
open issues
95
watchers
25
size
8 MB
created
last push

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.

What was measured

From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.

Install time
15 minutes
Cold machine to finish
3 minutes
Errors hit and fixed
0 hit, 0 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved
npm test exited 0, 53 passed (3 todo), 5 suites; npm run build produced lib/index.js; npm run tsc clean; npm run lint clean
Model tokens used
23,025
Exact commit tested
09d8f313dcc8
Container image
sha256:cdd920bce783

What was not measured

The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.

Peak GPU memory
this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
Behaviour over a long run
each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
Behaviour against real services
this run was verified against stand-in services only

The end of the recording

The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.

Everything works perfectly. Here's the final result:
**Install**: `npm ci` installed 635 packages (Node 24.21.0 was installed via nvm since only Node 18…
**Build**: `tsc --noEmit` passes cleanly; `npm run build` produces `lib/index.js` (725kb).
**Lint**: `npm run lint` passes with no issues.
**Tests**: All 5 suites pass, 53 of 56 tests pass (3 todo/skipped), 0 failures.
tokens used
23,025
Everything works perfectly. Here's the final result:
**Install**: `npm ci` installed 635 packages (Node 24.21.0 was installed via nvm since only Node 18…
**Build**: `tsc --noEmit` passes cleanly; `npm run build` produces `lib/index.js` (725kb).
**Lint**: `npm run lint` passes with no issues.
**Tests**: All 5 suites pass, 53 of 56 tests pass (3 todo/skipped), 0 failures.

Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.

How it was tested

One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.

Strengths and limits

Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.

What went well

  • Installed in 15 minutes.
  • Nothing broke on the way: zero errors between clone and running.
  • Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.

What did not, or is not known

  • Only reached a running state against stand-in services, so nothing here proves it works against the real ones.
  • Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.

Also tested, in the same area

Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.

Run history

tested byattemptoutcomescorecost USDwhen
Argusic Runner1/3Runs with mocks92.000.01

Topics (from GitHub)

actionsgatsbygithub-actionsgithub-pageshugomdbookmkdocsnextjsnuxtstatic-site-generatorvuepress

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/actions-gh-pages.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/actions-gh-pages)

Questions

Does actions-gh-pages run?
actions-gh-pages runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 15 minutes, hitting 0 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test actions-gh-pages?
On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 09d8f313dcc8. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test actions-gh-pages?
The run that produced this verdict cost $0.01: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does actions-gh-pages take to install?
15 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
Does actions-gh-pages need a GPU?
Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing actions-gh-pages?
Nothing did, in the recorded run: zero errors between clone and running.
Where is the evidence for actions-gh-pages?
The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.

Discussion