Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 13:44 UTC

alleyinteractive / wp-match-blocks

Match WordPress blocks in the given content.

PHPGPL-2.0★ 9 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Aug 2022View on GitHub ↗

alleyinteractive/wp-match-blocks holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (68/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (32/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

AlleyOrganization
115 followers273 public repossince May 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistalleyinteractive/wp-match-blocksv4.3.032,34410294 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

54Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
9.4/18Commit volume10 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year10
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases10 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 293 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~132.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv4.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release293
mean_days_between_releases132.3
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?

57Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
14.6/60Stars9 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
7.2/15Watchers21 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars9
watchers21
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
60.1/80Monthly downloads32,344 downloads/month across packagist
4/20Registry dependents3 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesalleyinteractive/wp-match-blocks
dependents3
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads516,278
monthly_downloads32,344
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
25.2/42Issue resolution60% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance18/18 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 8/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs18
open_issues2
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.6
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
14.8/25Owner reach115 followers of alleyinteractive
25/25Track record273 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers115
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginalleyinteractive
public_repos273
account_age_days5,238
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 294 days ago
20/20Version history10 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesalleyinteractive/wp-match-blocks
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish294

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

68Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests2 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics1 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicswordpress
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?

49Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0.5/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-ReviewFound 8/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

32At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
10.2/40Legible commit history18 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.191
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configphpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
2.1/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 94 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.011
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/36 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes11,743
source_files_sampled36
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

9GitHub stars
1contributors
10commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
2open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 13:44 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
2CI-Tests2 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 8/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistalleyinteractive/composer-wordpress-autoloader^1.0composer.json
Packagistalleyinteractive/laminas-validator-extensions^2.0composer.json
Packagistalleyinteractive/wp-type-extensions^4.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/serializer^7.2composer.json
All dependencies 10

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 6 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistalleyinteractive/composer-wordpress-autoloaderdirect
Packagistalleyinteractive/laminas-validator-extensionsdirect
Packagistalleyinteractive/wp-type-extensionsdirect
Packagistsymfony/serializerdirect
Packagistalleyinteractive/alley-coding-standardsindirect
Packagistergebnis/composer-normalizeindirect
Packagistext-simplexmlindirect
Packagistmantle-framework/testkitindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistszepeviktor/phpstan-wordpressindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statisticsPackagist.