# mock-server/mockserver-monorepo — health index 91/100 (Excellent)

> Inspection of the public repository mock-server/mockserver-monorepo by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/mock-server/mockserver-monorepo
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/mock-server/mockserver-monorepo
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/mock-server/mockserver-monorepo/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/m/mock-server/mockserver-monorepo.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-29
- Methodology: metrics 2.3.1, report schema 0.27.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 21% | 80/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 17% | 95/100 | Exceptional |
| Sustainability & Governance | 23% | 63/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 19% | 94/100 | Exceptional |
| Security | 16% | 53/100 | Moderate |
| AI Readiness | 4% | 88/100 | Excellent |

The weighted overall 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | MockServer is an HTTP(S) mock server and proxy for testing that lets you mock APIs, inspect and modify live traffic, and inject failures. It supports HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, gRPC, WebSockets, TCP and more on a single port, with additional support for HTTP/3, message brokers, and AI/LLM APIs. |
| Homepage | https://www.mock-server.com |
| Primary language | Java |
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 4,929 |
| Forks | 1,113 |
| Created | 2013-02-26 |
| Last push | 2026-07-29 |
| Latest release | mockserver-7.5.0 |
| Commits (last year) | 2,801 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | mock-server, proxy, java-client, javascript-client, node-module, node-client, ruby-client, homebrew, grunt-plugin, ai, chaos-engineering, llm, mcp, python, testing |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| go | github.com/mock-server/mockserver-monorepo/mockserver-client-go/v7 | v7.5.0 | — |
| npm | mockserver-node | 7.5.0 | 39,356 |
| npm | mockserver | 3.1.1 | 34,751 |
| crates | mockserver-client | 7.5.0 | 117 |
| npm | mockserver-client | 7.5.0 | 628,506 |
| packagist | mock-server/mockserver-client | 7.5.0 | 8 |
| pypi | mockserver-client | 7.5.0 | 13,985 |
| rubygems | mockserver-client | 7.5.0 | — |

## Vitality — 80/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 21% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 74/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 9.7 / 36 | 14/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 2801 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 8 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 0 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~10 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | last human commit 4 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 95/100 (Exceptional)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 17% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 96/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 59.9 / 60 | 4,929 stars |
| Forks | met | 25 / 25 | 1,113 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 11.5 / 15 | 116 watchers |

### Community health — 92/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | met | 6.3 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 97/100 (Exceptional)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 77.8 / 80 | 681,964 downloads/month across crates, go, npm, pypi, rubygems |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 63/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 23% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 34/100 (At Risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 1.1 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 95% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 99 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 19 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 70/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | met | 42 / 42 | 100% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 19.1 / 30 | 770/1212 decided PRs merged |
| Newcomer PR acceptance | excluded | 0 / 13 | no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | not met | 0 / 15 | Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 63/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 12.7 / 25 | 57 followers of mock-server |
| Track record | partial | 20.3 / 25 | 13 public repos, account ~8 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 6 package(s) on crates, go, npm, pypi, rubygems |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 0 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 57 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 94/100 (Exceptional)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 19% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 5 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | eslint.config.js |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://www.mock-server.com |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 15 topics |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 53/100 (Moderate)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 58/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | partial | 2.2 / 7.5 | binaries present in source code |
| Branch-Protection | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | internal 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 |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 19 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 1.5 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3 |
| SAST | met | 5 / 5 | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| Security-Policy | met | 5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | partial | 6.8 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | partial | 0.8 / 7.5 | 9 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 34/100 (At Risk)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 1745 resolved dependencies against OSV; 146 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.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 2.4 / 35 | 13 affected: org.apache.tomcat.embed:tomcat-embed-core 9.0.117 (critical 9.8), org.springframework:spring-web 5.3.39 (critical 9.8), com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core 2.21.3 (high 7.5), +10 more |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | excluded | 0 / 25 | transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 22.9 / 40 | 4 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1527 days ago |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Exceptional)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 88/100 (Excellent)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight: agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but its absence must never gate the top of the scale (calibration saturates at raw 91, so 100/100 remains reachable with AI Readiness at zero).

### Agent context & guidance — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | met | 15 / 15 | llms.txt present |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 79 of 79 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 78/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | partial | 12.6 / 18 | examples/dotnet/callback/callback.csproj, examples/dotnet/create_expectation/create_expectation.csproj, examples/dotnet/load_scenario/load_scenario.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner) |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | eslint.config.js |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | mockserver-client-node/tsconfig.json, mockserver-testcontainers/node/tsconfig.json, mockserver-ui/tsconfig.json, mockserver-vscode/tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | not met | 0 / 10 | no agent-authored commits among the last 100 |
| Automated maintenance | met | 8 / 8 | 21 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 3 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3 |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Java (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 53.9 / 55 | 71/3695 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 80/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | examples/docker-compose/mock-from-openapi/config/openapi.yaml, examples/docker-compose/validation-proxy/config/openapi.yaml, mockserver/mockserver-core/src/test/resources/grpc/catalog.proto, mockserver/mockserver-core/src/test/resources/grpc/greeting.proto, mockserver/mockserver-core/src/test/resources/grpc/orders.proto, mockserver/mockserver-core/src/test/resources/grpc/orders_common.proto |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | examples |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
- npm package 'mockserver' points at a different repository (https://github.com/namshi/mockserver); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- packagist package 'mock-server/mockserver-client' points at a different repository (https://github.com/mock-server/mockserver-client-php); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- deps.dev does not index npm:mockserver-node@7.5.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt