Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 21:21 UTC

andrecrjr / mockzilla

Mockzilla is the Next Gen Mocking Tool API Server to easier create endpoints faster for MVPs with AI and MCP Tooling

TypeScript · MDXMIT★ 8 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Nov 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindMCP serverWeb interfaceDesktop applicationhow this is determined
#http#http-server#mcp-server#mock#open-source#server#test-automation#testing-tools#db#e2e#http-client#qa#ai

andrecrjr/mockzilla holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (88/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (32/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

André Carlos Jr.Personal account
12 followers44 public repossince Jun 2014Hitss Brasil

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

78Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence — 20/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 259 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_year259
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year20

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv1.0.6
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases2.9

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

32At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

16Critical
How it's scored
13.7/60Stars — 8 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars8
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

44Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

20At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 96% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.962

Issue & PR responsiveness

64Moderate
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
28.6/30PR acceptance — 20/21 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs20
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

52Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
8/25Owner reach — 12 followers of andrecrjr
24/25Track record — 44 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers12
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginandrecrjr
public_repos44
account_age_days4,405
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

80Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — biome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://mockzilla.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 13 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicshttp, http-server, mcp-server, mock, open-source, server, test-automation, testing-tools, db, e2e, http-client, qa, ai
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://mockzilla.dev
docs_sitehttps://mockzilla.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

34At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

34At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests — 8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no 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
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 103 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate3.4

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.

88Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes14,003
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

88Excellent
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — biome.json
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/208 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes50,700
source_files_sampled208
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

8GitHub stars
3contributors
259commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.io, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'mockzilla' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.4 / 10
3.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-15 21:20 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
8CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update 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
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities103 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 83
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@apidevtools/json-schema-ref-parser^15.3.5package.json
npm@electric-sql/pglite^0.3.15package.json
npm@faker-js/faker^10.2.0package.json
npm@hookform/resolvers^3.10.0package.json
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk1.29.0package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-accordion^1.2.12package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-alert-dialog^1.1.15package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-aspect-ratio1.1.1package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-avatar1.1.2package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-checkbox1.1.3package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-collapsible1.1.2package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-context-menu2.2.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-dialog1.1.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-dropdown-menu2.1.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-hover-card1.1.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-label2.1.1package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-menubar1.1.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-navigation-menu1.2.3package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-popover1.1.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-progress1.1.1package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-radio-group1.2.2package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-scroll-area1.2.2package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-select2.1.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-separator1.1.1package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-slider1.2.2package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-slot^1.2.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-switch^1.2.6package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-tabs1.1.2package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-toast1.2.4package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-toggle1.1.1package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-toggle-group1.1.1package.json
npm@radix-ui/react-tooltip1.1.6package.json
npm@tailwindcss/typography^0.5.19package.json
npm@tauri-apps/plugin-opener2package.json
npm@types/mdx^2.0.13package.json
npm@vercel/analytics1.3.1package.json
npmautoprefixer^10.4.23package.json
npmclass-variance-authority^0.7.1package.json
npmclsx^2.1.1package.json
npmcmdk1.0.4package.json
npmdate-fns4.1.0package.json
npmdrizzle-orm^0.36.4package.json
npmembla-carousel-react8.5.1package.json
npmgray-matter^4.0.3package.json
npmhandlebars^4.7.9package.json
npminput-otp1.4.1package.json
npmjson-schema-faker^0.5.9package.json
npmlucide-react^0.454.0package.json
npmmcp-handler^1.0.7package.json
npmnext16.2.6package.json
npmnext-mdx-remote^6.0.0package.json
npmnext-themes^0.4.6package.json
npmnextra^4.6.1package.json
npmnextra-theme-docs^4.6.1package.json
npmnuqs^2.8.9package.json
npmpg^8.17.1package.json
npmpino^10.3.1package.json
npmpino-pretty^13.1.3package.json
npmreact19.2.0package.json
npmreact-day-picker9.8.0package.json
npmreact-dom19.2.0package.json
npmreact-hook-form^7.71.1package.json
npmreact-resizable-panels^2.1.9package.json
npmrecharts2.15.4package.json
npmrehype-autolink-headings^7.1.0package.json
npmrehype-slug^6.0.0package.json
npmsonner^1.7.4package.json
npmswr2.3.6package.json
npmtailwind-merge^3.4.0package.json
npmtailwindcss-animate^1.0.7package.json
npmvaul^0.9.9package.json
npmyaml^2.8.3package.json
npmzod3.25.76package.json
npm@electric-sql/pglite^0.3.15scripts/package.json
npmdrizzle-orm^0.36.4scripts/package.json
npmpg^8.17.1scripts/package.json
crates.iotauri2src-tauri/Cargo.toml
crates.iotauri-plugin-shell2src-tauri/Cargo.toml
crates.iotauri-plugin-single-instance2src-tauri/Cargo.toml
crates.iotauri-plugin-opener2src-tauri/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1src-tauri/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1src-tauri/Cargo.toml
crates.ioureq2src-tauri/Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with andrecrjr/mockzilla. Read them side by side →

97line/armeriaYour go-to microservice framework for any situation, from the creator of Netty et al. You can build any type of microservice leveraging your favorite technologies, including gRPC, Thrift, Kotlin, Retrofit, Reactive Streams, Spring Boot and Dropwizard.Exceptional96jetty/jetty.projectEclipse Jetty® - Web Container & Clients - supports HTTP/3, HTTP/2, HTTP/1, websocket, servlets, and moreExceptional96keploy/keployOpen-source platform for creating safe, isolated production sandboxes for API, integration, and E2E testing.Exceptional100deepset-ai/haystackOpen-source AI orchestration framework for building context-engineered, production-ready LLM applications. Design modular pipelines and agent workflows with explicit control over retrieval, routing, memory, and generation. Built for scalable agents, RAG, multimodal applications, semantic search, and conversational systems.Exceptional99microsoft/playwrightPlaywright is a framework for Web Testing and Automation. It allows testing Chromium, Firefox and WebKit with a single API. Exceptional99axios/axiosPromise based HTTP client for the browser and node.jsExceptional

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.