Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 08:51 UTC

Shopify / rubocop-sorbet

A collection of RuboCop rules for Sorbet

RubyMIT★ 201 stars⑂ 33 forkssince Jul 2019View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

Shopify/rubocop-sorbet holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (93/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (45/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

94
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ShopifyOrganization · verified domain
8,707 followers1,236 public repossince Apr 2008

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsrubocop-sorbet0.17.1-6212 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

93Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 6 days ago
24.9/36Commit cadence — 36/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 171 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year171
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year36

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 48 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 12 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~40.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count48
latest_release_tagv0.17.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release12
mean_days_between_releases40.4
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?

80Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
37.3/60Stars — 201 stars
12.5/25Forks — 33 forks
13.9/15Watchers — 311 watchers
Inputs used
forks33
stars201
watchers311
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
77.8/80Total downloads — 30,975,423 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrubocop-sorbet
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads30,975,423
monthly_downloads—
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

89Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 33% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 47 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 27 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled47
top_contributor_share0.33
How it's scored
36.5/42Issue resolution — 87% of issues closed
26.8/30PR acceptance — 311/348 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs311
open_issues9
closed_issues59
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d7
prs_decided_30d9
issue_closed_ratio0.868
closed_unmerged_prs37
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 8,707 followers of Shopify
25/25Track record — 1,236 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers8,707
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginShopify
public_repos1,236
account_age_days6,755

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 12 days ago
20/20Version history — 62 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrubocop-sorbet
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish12

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 12 out of 12 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

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrubocop, ruby
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

68Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 12 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 10/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 27 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
3.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate6.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
20.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: yard 0.9.37 (moderate 5.3)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
35.3/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 185 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages3
assessed_packages47
unassessed_packages3
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1, low 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 47 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 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.

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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
23/40Legible commit history — 41 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.432
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 3 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.03
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/146 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes38,550
source_files_sampled146
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

201GitHub stars
47contributors
171commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
48releases
3bus factor
9open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 33 ⇿
0Stars
33Forks
43Releases

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.

01325383342019-092023-032026-10
Major 0Minor 10Patch 33

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.7 / 10
6.7aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 08:51 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests12 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 10/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 27 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
7Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsdebug—Gemfile
RubyGemsrake>= 12.3.3Gemfile
RubyGemsminitest—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-minitest>= 0.38.1Gemfile
RubyGemsmocha—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-shopify—Gemfile
RubyGemsparallel~> 1.10Gemfile
RubyGemsyard~> 0.9Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop>= 1.75.2Gemfile
All dependencies 50

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsdebug1.11.0direct
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6direct
RubyGemsmocha2.7.1direct
RubyGemsparallel1.28.0direct
RubyGemsrake13.3.0direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.88.2direct
RubyGemsrubocop-minitest0.38.1direct
RubyGemsrubocop-shopify2.17.1direct
RubyGemsyard0.9.37direct
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemscgi0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsdate3.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb4.0.4indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsirb1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.1indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.12.0indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.2indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.2.6indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrbi—indirect
RubyGemsrbi0.4.3indirect
RubyGemsrbs—indirect
RubyGemsrbs4.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.14.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.1indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemsruby2_keywords0.0.5indirect
RubyGemssorbet0.6.13386indirect
RubyGemssorbet-runtime0.6.13386indirect
RubyGemssorbet-static0.6.13386indirect
RubyGemssorbet-static-and-runtime0.6.13386indirect
RubyGemsspoom—indirect
RubyGemsspoom1.8.6indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.1.7indirect
RubyGemsthor1.5.0indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 47 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
erb4.0.4indirecthigh16.0.4
yard0.9.37directmoderate20.9.44
json2.21.1indirectlow12.21.2

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.

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 — RubyGems.