Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-03 09:56 UTC

neos / behat

PHPNo license detected★ 4 stars⑂ 13 forkssince Nov 2016View on GitHub ↗

neos/behat holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (84/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (34/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

54
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.

54
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

NeosOrganization
94 followers152 public repossince Mar 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistneos/behat9.1.225,5122995 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

48Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18Commit volume6 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year6
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases22 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 459 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~162.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tag9.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release459
mean_days_between_releases162.4
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
7.7/60Stars4 stars
9/25Forks13 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks13
stars4
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5Licenseno license file detected
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
58.8/80Monthly downloads25,512 downloads/month across packagist
9.1/20Registry dependents22 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesneos/behat
dependents22
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads884,138
monthly_downloads25,512
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

84Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 25% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth18 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.246
How it's scored
38.5/42Issue resolution92% of issues closed
24/30PR acceptance24/30 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs24
open_issues1
closed_issues11
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.917
closed_unmerged_prs6
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
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
14.2/25Owner reach94 followers of neos
25/25Track record152 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers94
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginneos
public_repos152
account_age_days4,153
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 95 days ago
20/20Version history29 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesneos/behat
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish95

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

34At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicshacktoberfest, testing-tools
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

49Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0/2.5Licenselicense file not detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate3.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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
advisories23
affected_packages5
assessed_packages40
unassessed_packages3
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 4
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 40 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 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.

38Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
18.1/40Legible commit history34 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.34
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/5 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes7,235
source_files_sampled5
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 examplesexample
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
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

4GitHub stars
18contributors
6commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
22releases
3bus factor
1open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 13 ⇿
0Stars
13Forks
14Releases

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.

03581013151312016-112019-102022-10
Major 5Minor 6Patch 3

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.6 / 10
3.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-03 09:55 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 6/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistneos/flow~9.2.0composer.json
Packagistbehat/behat^3.10composer.json
All dependencies 43

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 40 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistbehat/behatdirect
Packagistbehat/behat3.8.1direct
Packagistneos/flowdirect
Packagistbehat/gherkin4.6.2indirect
Packagistbehat/mink1.8.1indirect
Packagistbehat/mink-browserkit-driver1.3.4indirect
Packagistbehat/mink-extension2.3.1indirect
Packagistbehat/mink-goutte-driver1.2.1indirect
Packagistbehat/mink-selenium2-driver1.4.0indirect
Packagistbehat/transliterator1.3.0indirect
Packagistfabpot/goutte3.3.1indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle6.5.5indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/promises1.4.0indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr71.7.0indirect
Packagistinstaclick/php-webdriver1.4.7indirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistpsr/container1.0.0indirect
Packagistpsr/event-dispatcher1.0.0indirect
Packagistpsr/http-message1.0.1indirect
Packagistralouphie/getallheaders3.0.3indirect
Packagistsymfony/browser-kit4.4.17indirect
Packagistsymfony/config4.4.17indirect
Packagistsymfony/console5.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/css-selector5.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/dependency-injection4.4.17indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts2.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/dom-crawler4.4.17indirect
Packagistsymfony/event-dispatcher5.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/event-dispatcher-contracts2.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/filesystem5.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-grapheme1.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-idn1.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer1.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-mbstring1.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php721.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php731.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php801.20.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/service-contracts2.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/string5.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/translation4.4.17indirect
Packagistsymfony/translation-contracts2.3.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/yaml5.2.0indirect
Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 40 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
guzzlehttp/guzzle6.5.5indirecthigh127.15.1
guzzlehttp/psr71.7.0indirectmoderate62.12.3
symfony/dom-crawler4.4.17indirectmoderate18.0.12
symfony/polyfill-intl-idn1.20.0indirectmoderate11.38.1
symfony/yaml5.2.0indirectmoderate38.0.12

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 v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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