Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 17:07 UTC

lfdubiela / mockwave

HTTP mock server with Goja scripting, MCP integration for AI-assisted rule generation, and a real-time admin UI. Local dev or deployed.

Go · HTMLMIT★ 14 stars⑂ 0 forkssince May 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork serviceCommand-line toolhow this is determined

lfdubiela/mockwave holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (73/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (33/100). It was last updated 17 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

53
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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Luiz DubielaPersonal account
19 followers27 public repossince Feb 2014@pismo.io

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?

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 17 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 422 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year422
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push17
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 30 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 17 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~8.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count30
latest_release_tagv0.26.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release17
mean_days_between_releases8.5

Community & Adoption

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

33At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
18.1/60Stars — 14 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars14
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
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_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

42Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 4/4 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs4
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
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): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
9.4/25Owner reach — 19 followers of lfdubiela
22.5/25Track record — 27 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers19
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginlfdubiela
public_repos27
account_age_days4,599
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

63Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsapi-testing, developer-tools, goja, golang, http, local-dev, mcp, mock-server
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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 — 14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
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.
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
2.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: google.golang.org/grpc v1.82.1 (high 7.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories10
affected_packages2
assessed_packages58
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 58 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 100 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/209 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes37,254
source_files_sampled209
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — internal/adapters/cfg/restapi/openapi.yaml
0/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesinternal/adapters/cfg/restapi/openapi.yaml
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

14GitHub stars
1contributors
422commits, last 12 months
17days since last push
30releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/mockwave/mockwave' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.0 / 10
4.0aggregate

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).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-19 17:07 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
0CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not 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.
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3Vulnerabilities7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2v1.43.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/configv1.32.32go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/credentialsv1.19.31go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/dynamodbv1.62.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/eventbridgev1.48.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/snsv1.42.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/sqsv1.46.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/dop251/gojav0.0.0-20260723142020-b4aef50fa347go.mod
Gogithub.com/getkin/kin-openapiv0.145.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/mark3labs/mcp-gov0.57.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1go.mod
Gogo.mongodb.org/mongo-driverv1.17.9go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.82.1go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
All dependencies 58

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 17 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2v1.43.1direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/configv1.32.32direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/credentialsv1.19.31direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/dynamodbv1.62.1direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/eventbridgev1.48.1direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/snsv1.42.1direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/sqsv1.46.1direct
Gogithub.com/dop251/gojav0.0.0-20260723142020-b4aef50fa347direct
Gogithub.com/getkin/kin-openapiv0.145.0direct
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0direct
Gogithub.com/mark3labs/mcp-gov0.57.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1direct
Gogo.mongodb.org/mongo-driverv1.17.9direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.82.1direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/feature/ec2/imdsv1.18.32indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/configsourcesv1.4.32indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/endpoints/v2v2.7.32indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/v4av1.4.33indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/accept-encodingv1.13.14indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/endpoint-discoveryv1.12.9indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/presigned-urlv1.13.32indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/signinv1.5.1indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssov1.33.1indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssooidcv1.38.1indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/stsv1.45.1indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/smithy-gov1.27.5indirect
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/dlclark/regexp2v1.11.4indirect
Gogithub.com/dlclark/regexp2/v2v2.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/jsonpointerv0.22.5indirect
Gogithub.com/go-openapi/swag/jsonnamev0.25.5indirect
Gogithub.com/go-sourcemap/sourcemapv2.1.3+incompatibleindirect
Gogithub.com/golang/snappyv0.0.4indirect
Gogithub.com/google/jsonschema-gov0.4.2indirect
Gogithub.com/google/pprofv0.0.0-20230207041349-798e818bf904indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.19.1indirect
Gogithub.com/montanaflynn/statsv0.7.1indirect
Gogithub.com/oasdiff/yamlv0.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/oasdiff/yaml3v0.0.14indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/santhosh-tekuri/jsonschema/v6v6.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/castv1.7.1indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.9indirect
Gogithub.com/xdg-go/pbkdf2v1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/xdg-go/scramv1.1.2indirect
Gogithub.com/xdg-go/stringprepv1.0.4indirect
Gogithub.com/yosida95/uritemplate/v3v3.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/youmark/pkcs8v0.0.0-20240726163527-a2c0da244d78indirect
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.54.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.57.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.40.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20260414002931-afd174a4e478indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 58 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
google.golang.org/grpcv1.82.1directhigh61.85.0-dev.0.20260825072537-93e31b48545e
golang.org/x/cryptov0.54.0indirectunknown40.56.0

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.

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.