Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 21:33 UTC

knocklabs / knock-ruby

Official Ruby SDK for interacting with the Knock API

RubyApache-2.0★ 2 stars⑂ 6 forkssince Aug 2021View on GitHub ↗

knocklabs/knock-ruby holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (45/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

KnockOrganization · verified domain
121 followers78 public repossince Oct 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsknockapi1.40.0-682 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence25/52 weeks with commits
16.9/18Commit volume76 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year76
human_commit_share0.53
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year25

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases67 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~21.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count67
latest_release_tagv1.40.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases21.8
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?

45Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars2 stars
5.8/25Forks6 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars2
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.5/80Total downloads219,565 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesknockapi
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads219,565
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?

81Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 42% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth13 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled13
top_contributor_share0.424
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
27/30PR acceptance72/80 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs72
open_issues0
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs8
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
20/20Verified domain
15/25Owner reach121 followers of knocklabs
24.8/25Track record78 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers121
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginknocklabs
public_repos78
account_age_days2,148

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history68 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesknockapi
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 1 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
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://gemdocs.org/gems/knockapi
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsruby, ruby-gem
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://gemdocs.org/gems/knockapi
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
3/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
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-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories11
affected_packages5
assessed_packages75
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severityhigh 4, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 75 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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.

63Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.knock.app/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history45 of 53 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.knock.app/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.849
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 environmentlockfile
8/10Demonstrated agent practice4 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.04
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/277 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes27,566
source_files_sampled277
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

2GitHub stars
13contributors
76commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
67releases
2bus factor
0open 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 ★ / 6 ⇿
0Stars
6Forks
53Releases

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.

123456612023-052024-112026-04
Major 1Minor 37Patch 15

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-05 21:33 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
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
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 77

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 77 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.1indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.8.7indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsasync2.34.0indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.3.1indirect
RubyGemscgiindirect
RubyGemscgi0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.5indirect
RubyGemsconnection_poolindirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.5.4indirect
RubyGemsconsole1.34.2indirect
RubyGemscrack1.0.1indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.2indirect
RubyGemsfiber-annotation0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsfiber-local1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsfiber-storage1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsfileutils1.8.0indirect
RubyGemshashdiff1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.7indirect
RubyGemsio-event1.11.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.15.2indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslisten3.9.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmetrics0.15.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.26.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-focus1.4.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-hooks1.5.2indirect
RubyGemsminitest-proveit1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-rg5.3.0indirect
RubyGemsmutex_m0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsnetrc0.11.0indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.27.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.10.0indirect
RubyGemsprettier_print1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsprism1.6.0indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix6.0.2indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsrbi0.3.7indirect
RubyGemsrbs3.9.5indirect
RubyGemsredcarpet3.6.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.11.3indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.81.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.47.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssorbet0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemssorbet-runtime0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemssorbet-static0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemssorbet-static-and-runtime0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemsspoom1.6.3indirect
RubyGemssteep1.10.0indirect
RubyGemsstrscan3.1.5indirect
RubyGemssyntax_tree6.3.0indirect
RubyGemstapioca0.16.11indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table4.0.0indirect
RubyGemsthor1.4.0indirect
RubyGemstraces0.18.2indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.1.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.0indirect
RubyGemswebmock3.26.1indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.9.1indirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.37indirect
RubyGemsyard-sorbet0.9.0indirect
Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 75 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activesupport8.1.1indirecthigh38.1.2.1
addressable2.8.7indirecthigh12.9.0
concurrent-ruby1.3.5indirecthigh31.3.7
json2.15.2indirecthigh22.19.9
yard0.9.37indirectmoderate20.9.44

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 statisticsRubyGems.