Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 22:15 UTC

neo4j / neo4j-dotnet-driver

Neo4j Bolt driver for .NET

C#Apache-2.0★ 247 stars⑂ 64 forkssince Jan 2016View on GitHub ↗
#csharp#dotnet#driver#neo4j#binary-protocol#cypher#cypher-query#database-driver#graph-database#graph-database-neo4j#protocol

neo4j/neo4j-dotnet-driver holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (30/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

78
overall / 100
Good

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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Neo4jOrganization
1,302 followers95 public repossince Feb 2010

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

84Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence — 30/52 weeks with commits
17.5/18Commit volume — 88 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_year88
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year30

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 83 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 25 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~22.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count83
latest_release_tag6.2.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release25
mean_days_between_releases22.2
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?

67Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

64Moderate
How it's scored
38.8/60Stars — 247 stars
15/25Forks — 64 forks
10/15Watchers — 64 watchers
Inputs used
forks64
stars247
watchers64
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges—
has_contributingyes
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?

82Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

64Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 32% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 26 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled26
top_contributor_share0.319

Issue & PR responsiveness

88Excellent
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
25.6/30PR acceptance — 697/817 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 17/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs697
open_issues0
closed_issues122
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs120
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

97Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
22.4/25Owner reach — 1,302 followers of neo4j
25/25Track record — 95 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,302
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginneo4j
public_repos95
account_age_days6,002
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

38Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

24At Risk
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 24 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 11 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscsharp, dotnet, driver, neo4j, binary-protocol, cypher, cypher-query, database-driver, graph-database, graph-database-neo4j, protocol
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?

58Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

58Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 24 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 17/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
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
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
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, 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.

30At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
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_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

26At Risk
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
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_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
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 — C# (statically typed)
54.9/55Manageable file sizes — 2/907 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes69,926
source_files_sampled907
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

247GitHub stars
26contributors
88commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
83releases
2bus factor
0open issues
—package ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 22:15 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
9CI-Tests24 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 17/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
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
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
All dependencies 53

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 53 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetAutofac8.0.0indirect
NuGetAutofac.Extensions.DependencyInjection9.0.0indirect
NuGetAutoFixture4.18.1indirect
NuGetAutoFixture.AutoMoq4.18.1indirect
NuGetAutoFixture.Xunit34.19.0indirect
NuGetBouncyCastle.Cryptography2.4.0indirect
NuGetCastle.Core4.1.1indirect
NuGetCastle.Core5.1.1indirect
NuGetFluentAssertions4.19.3indirect
NuGetFluentAssertions5.10.3indirect
NuGetJetBrains.Annotations2025.2.4indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Bcl.AsyncInterfaces6.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp5.3.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.13.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Reactive.Testing5.0.0indirect
NuGetMoq4.20.69indirect
NuGetMoq4.7.63indirect
NuGetMoq.AutoMock3.5.0indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.4indirect
NuGetPortable.BouncyCastle1.8.8indirect
NuGetSerilog3.1.1indirect
NuGetSerilog.Enrichers.Thread3.1.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Extensions.Logging8.0.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Settings.Configuration8.0.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.Console5.0.1indirect
NuGetSwashbuckle.AspNetCore6.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.IO.Pipelines8.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Linq.Async7.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Net.NameResolution4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Net.Security4.3.1indirect
NuGetSystem.Net.Security4.3.2indirect
NuGetSystem.Net.Sockets4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Reactive5.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Runtime.Serialization.Primitives4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Security.Cryptography.Algorithms4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Security.Cryptography.Encoding4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Security.Cryptography.Primitives4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Threading.Tasks4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Threading.Tasks.Parallel4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Threading.Thread4.3.0indirect
NuGetTeamCity.VSTest.TestAdapter1.0.23indirect
NuGetxunit2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.abstractions2.0.1indirect
NuGetxunit.assert2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.core2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.core2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.execution2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.runner.console2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio3.1.5indirect
NuGetxunit.v33.2.2indirect
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 neo4j/neo4j-dotnet-driver. Read them side by side →

96neo4j/neo4j-python-driverNeo4j Bolt driver for PythonExceptional98neo4j/neo4j-graphrag-pythonNeo4j GraphRAG for PythonExceptional100AvaloniaUI/AvaloniaDevelop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The future of .NET UIExceptional98pulumi/pulumiPulumi - Infrastructure as Code in any programming language 🚀Exceptional98valkey-io/valkey-glideAn open source Valkey client library that supports Valkey, and Redis open source 6.2, 7.0 and 7.2. Valkey GLIDE is designed for reliability, optimized performance, and high-availability, for Valkey and Redis OSS based applications. GLIDE is a multi language client library, written in Rust with programming language bindings, such as Java and PythonExceptional98unoplatform/unoOpen-source platform for building cross-platform native Mobile, Web, Desktop, and Embedded apps from a single C#/XAML codebase. Work from any IDE/CLI with Hot Reload, Visual Designer, MCPs, and Skills built for modern .NET workflows. 200M+ NuGet downloads.Exceptional

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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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