github-pages-deploy-action
🚀 Automatically deploy your project to GitHub Pages using GitHub Actions. This action can be configured to push your production-ready code into any branch you'd like.
Runs with mockssource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit 8fd6702fce08
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: action, actions, cicd, continuous delivery, continuous deployment, continuous integration, deploy and deployer.
github-pages-deploy-action runs, with stand-ins for the services it depends on. An Argusic agent installed it in 3 minutes and hit 2 errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
The TypeScript project builds and all 75 tests pass after installing Node v24.13.0 via nvm; the action itself cannot run end-to-end without a GitHub Actions environment and rsync, but all verifiable unit/integration tests succeed.
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 82 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
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.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- Node.js v18.19.1 present but project requires v24.13.01 minute
- rsync not found (no root to install package)
- Install time
- 3 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 5 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 2 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- npm test exited 0: 7 test suites passed, 75 tests passed. npm run build succeeded. node lib/main.js prints expected validation error.
- Model tokens used
- 43,263
- Exact commit tested
- 8fd6702fce08
- 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.
**5. Runtime check** ― `node lib/main.js` exits gracefully with a "folder to deploy" validation err… ## Result tokens used 43,263 All done. Here's a clear summary of what happened: ## Work Done **1. Node version mismatch (fix)** ― The container had Node v18.19.1; `.node-version` requires v24.… **2. `npm install`** ― Ran with v24.13.0. Succeeded (only engine warnings for ESLint deps, non-bloc… **3. `npm run build`** ― Succeeded: TypeScript compiles to `lib/` with declarations. **4. `npm test`** ― **7 suites passed, 75 tests passed, all passing.** The action runs on GitHub ru… **5. Runtime check** ― `node lib/main.js` exits gracefully with a "folder to deploy" validation err… ## Result
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 3 minutes.
- 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.
- Hit 2 errors during setup, 1 of which were not solved.
- 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 by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Runs with mocks | 82.00 | 0.02 |
Topics (from GitHub)
actionactionscicdcontinuous-deliverycontinuous-deploymentcontinuous-integrationdeploydeployerdeploymentgh-pagesghpagesgithub-actiongithub-actionsgithub-enterprisegithub-pageshacktoberfeststaticworkflowworkflow-configurationworkflow-runs
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/github-pages-deploy-action)Questions
- Does github-pages-deploy-action run?
- github-pages-deploy-action runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 3 minutes, hitting 2 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test github-pages-deploy-action?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 8fd6702fce08. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test github-pages-deploy-action?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.02: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does github-pages-deploy-action take to install?
- 3 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 github-pages-deploy-action need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing github-pages-deploy-action?
- 2 things broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for github-pages-deploy-action?
- 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.