Public recordModerate
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 01:12 UTC
Labbs / fiber-oapi
Small lib for create openapi documentation and expose it automatically (json and swagger ui)
Labbs/fiber-oapi holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (67/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated 30 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.
54
overall / 100Software 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.
54
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)
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
LabbsOrganization
2 followers16 public repossince Aug 2022
This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.
Package ecosystems
| Registry | Package | Version | Downloads / mo | Versions | Last publish |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/labbs/fiber-oapi/v3 | v3.1.0 | - | 4 | 109 days ago |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
67
Development activity
51Moderate
How it's scored
| 28.8/36 | Push recency — last push 30 days ago |
| 7.6/36 | Commit cadence — 11/52 weeks with commits |
| 14.4/18 | Commit volume — 39 commits in the last year |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 39 |
| human_commit_share | 0.725 |
| days_since_last_push | 30 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 11 |
Release discipline
90Excellent
How it's scored
| 27/27 | Ships releases — 27 releases published |
| 27/36 | Release recency — latest release 109 days ago |
| 27/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~12.5 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 27 |
| latest_release_tag | v3.1.0 |
| releases_from_tags | no |
| days_since_latest_release | 109 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 12.5 |
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?
24
Popularity & adoption
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/60 | Stars — 1 stars |
| 0/25 | Forks — 0 forks |
| 0/15 | Watchers — 0 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 0 |
| stars | 1 |
| watchers | 0 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 22.5/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (MIT) |
| 0/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 0/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 0/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | yes |
| has_license | yes |
| readme_badges | 0 |
| has_contributing | no |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | — |
| has_pull_request_template | no |
Sustainability & Governance
Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?
49
Maintainer resilience (bus factor)
13Critical
How it's scored
| 9/54 | Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 0/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits |
| 1.4/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 1 contributors |
| 3/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 1 |
| contributors_sampled | 1 |
| top_contributor_share | 1 |
Issue & PR responsiveness
57Moderate
How it's scored
| 0/42 | Issue resolution — no issues or no data |
| 25.8/30 | PR acceptance — 49/57 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 0/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 49 |
| open_issues | 0 |
| closed_issues | 0 |
| prs_merged_7d | 0 |
| prs_decided_7d | 0 |
| prs_merged_30d | 0 |
| prs_decided_30d | 0 |
| issue_closed_ratio | — |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 8 |
| first_time_authors_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_merged_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_decided_30d | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
Ownership & stewardship
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 30/30 | Ownership backing — organization-owned |
| 0/20 | Verified domain |
| 3.4/25 | Owner reach — 2 followers of Labbs |
| 17.1/25 | Track record — 16 public repos, account ~4 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 2 |
| owner_type | Organization |
| is_verified | no |
| owner_login | Labbs |
| public_repos | 16 |
| account_age_days | 1,482 |
Package maintenance
92Excellent
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go |
| 35/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 109 days ago |
| 12/20 | Version history — 4 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | github.com/labbs/fiber-oapi/v3 |
| ecosystems | go |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 109 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
61
Engineering practices
68Good
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 1 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 0/16 | Linter config |
| 0/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | no |
| has_linter_config | no |
| has_precommit_config | no |
Documentation
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 30/30 | README |
| 0/25 | Documentation directory |
| 0/15 | Documentation / homepage site |
| 10/10 | Repository description |
| 0/10 | Topics |
| 10/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | — |
| has_wiki | yes |
| homepage | — |
| docs_site | — |
| has_readme | yes |
| has_docs_dir | no |
| has_description | yes |
Security
Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?
58
Security posture
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 6.8/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code |
| 2.2/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0.8/2.5 | Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected |
| 0/5 | Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 0/7.5 | Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |
| 0/5 | Packaging — no data |
| 0/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| 5/5 | SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 0/5 | Security-Policy — security policy file not detected |
| 0/7.5 | Signed-Releases — no data |
| 7.5/7.5 | Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege |
| 1.5/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 8 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 16 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 2 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 5 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
Dependency advisories
89Excellent
How it's scored
| 26.6/35 | Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3 v3.3.0 (unknown) |
| 0/25 | Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| 40/40 | No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days |
Inputs used
| source | osv |
| advisories | 78 |
| affected_packages | 15 |
| assessed_packages | 41 |
| unassessed_packages | 0 |
| affected_by_severity | critical 2, moderate 2, unknown 11 |
| direct_affected_packages | 1 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 41 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.
67
Agent context & guidance
40Weak
How it's scored
| 0/45 | Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| 0/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) |
| 40/40 | Legible commit history — 32 of 37 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | no |
| llms_txt_url | — |
| legible_history_share | 0.865 |
| agent_instruction_files | — |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | — |
How it's scored
| 12.6/18 | One-command bootstrap — _examples/auth/go.mod, _examples/auto_params/go.mod, _examples/custom_validation_error/go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner) |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 0/11 | Lint / format config |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — Go (statically typed) |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — lockfile |
| 10/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — 8 of the last 51 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| 8/8 | Automated maintenance — 14 of the last 51 commits are automated dependency updates |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | go.sum |
| has_dockerfile | no |
| typed_language | yes |
| bootstrap_files | — |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | no |
| typecheck_configs | — |
| agent_commit_share | 0.157 |
| toolchain_manifests | _examples/auth/go.mod, _examples/auto_params/go.mod, _examples/custom_validation_error/go.mod, _examples/simple/go.mod, _examples/simple_error/go.mod, go.mod |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0.275 |
Code legibility for models
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed) |
| 55/55 | Manageable file sizes — 0/42 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Go |
| largest_source_bytes | 38,146 |
| source_files_sampled | 42 |
| oversized_source_files | 0 |
Key facts
1GitHub stars
1contributors
39commits, last 12 months
30days since last push
27releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
More detail
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).
| 9 | Binary-Artifacts | binaries present in source code |
| 3 | Branch-Protection | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0 | Code-Review | Found 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 3 | Contributors | project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 10 | Dependency-Update-Tool | update tool detected |
| 0 | Fuzzing | project is not fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 0 | Maintained | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |
| n/a | Packaging | packaging workflow not detected |
| 0 | Pinned-Dependencies | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | SAST | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 0 | Security-Policy | security policy file not detected |
| n/a | Signed-Releases | no releases found |
| 10 | Token-Permissions | GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege |
| 2 | Vulnerabilities | 8 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 4
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/go-playground/validator/v10 | v10.30.2 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3 | v3.3.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/testify | v1.11.1 | go.mod |
| Go | gopkg.in/yaml.v3 | v3.0.1 | go.mod |
All dependencies 41
Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.
| Registry | Package | Version | Relation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/go-playground/validator/v10 | v10.30.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/go-playground/validator/v10 | v10.30.2 | direct |
| Go | github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3 | v3.3.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/testify | v1.11.1 | direct |
| Go | gopkg.in/yaml.v3 | v3.0.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/andybalholm/brotli | v1.2.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/andybalholm/brotli | v1.2.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/davecgh/go-spew | v1.1.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/gabriel-vasile/mimetype | v1.4.12 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/gabriel-vasile/mimetype | v1.4.13 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/go-playground/locales | v0.14.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/go-playground/universal-translator | v0.18.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2 | v2.52.12 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2 | v2.52.13 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/gofiber/schema | v1.7.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/gofiber/utils/v2 | v2.0.6 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/google/uuid | v1.6.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/klauspost/compress | v1.18.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/klauspost/compress | v1.18.6 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/leodido/go-urn | v1.4.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-colorable | v0.1.14 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-isatty | v0.0.20 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-isatty | v0.0.22 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-runewidth | v0.0.17 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/philhofer/fwd | v1.2.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/pmezard/go-difflib | v1.0.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/rivo/uniseg | v0.4.7 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/tinylib/msgp | v1.6.4 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/valyala/bytebufferpool | v1.0.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/valyala/fasthttp | v1.66.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/valyala/fasthttp | v1.71.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/crypto | v0.46.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/crypto | v0.49.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/crypto | v0.52.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/net | v0.55.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/sys | v0.39.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/sys | v0.42.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/sys | v0.45.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/text | v0.32.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/text | v0.35.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/text | v0.37.0 | indirect |
Dependency advisories 15
This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 41 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 15 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.
| Package | Version | Relation | Severity | Advisories | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| golang.org/x/crypto | v0.46.0 | indirect | critical | 30 | 0.56.0 |
| golang.org/x/crypto | v0.49.0 | indirect | critical | 30 | 0.56.0 |
| github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2 | v2.52.12 | indirect | moderate | 3 | 3.3.0 |
| github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2 | v2.52.13 | indirect | moderate | 1 | 3.3.0 |
| github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3 | v3.3.0 | direct | unknown | 1 | 3.4.0 |
| github.com/klauspost/compress | v1.18.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 1.18.7 |
| github.com/klauspost/compress | v1.18.6 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 1.18.7 |
| github.com/valyala/fasthttp | v1.66.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 1.70.0 |
| golang.org/x/crypto | v0.52.0 | indirect | unknown | 4 | 0.56.0 |
| golang.org/x/net | v0.55.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 1.27.0-rc.3 |
| golang.org/x/sys | v0.39.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 0.44.0 |
| golang.org/x/sys | v0.42.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 0.44.0 |
| golang.org/x/text | v0.32.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 0.39.0 |
| golang.org/x/text | v0.35.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 0.39.0 |
| golang.org/x/text | v0.37.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 0.39.0 |
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.
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 — Go.