Public record
Software health reportschema 0.26.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-22 06:09 UTC

netresearch / t3x-nr-llm

The shared AI foundation for TYPO3 — one LLM setup for every extension on your site

PHPGPL-2.0★ 4 stars⑂ 1 forksince Dec 2025View on GitHub ↗

netresearch/t3x-nr-llm holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (47/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

92
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.

92
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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

40 followers278 public repossince Nov 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistnetresearch/nr-llmv0.23.02,421431 day agotranslationextensionstreamingtypo3aichatbotgeminiopenaillmembeddingsclaudeollamaprovider-abstraction

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
20.1/36Commit cadence29/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume1,750 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,750
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year29

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases43 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~1.2 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count43
latest_release_tagv0.23.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases1.2

Community & Adoption

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

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars4 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars4
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
45.1/80Monthly downloads2,421 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesnetresearch/nr-llm
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads7,919
monthly_downloads2,421
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

72Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.995
How it's scored
40.5/42Issue resolution96% of issues closed
29/30PR acceptance443/459 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs443
open_issues1
closed_issues27
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.964
closed_unmerged_prs16
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
11.6/25Owner reach40 followers of netresearch
25/25Track record278 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers40
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginnetresearch
public_repos278
account_age_days6,097
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 1 days ago
20/20Version history43 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnetresearch/nr-llm
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows10 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://netresearch.github.io/t3x-nr-llm/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics14 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsai, claude, llm, openai, php, typo3, typo3-extension, anthropic, gemini, gpt, embeddings, ollama, provider-abstraction, streaming
has_wikino
homepagehttps://netresearch.github.io/t3x-nr-llm/
docs_sitehttps://netresearch.github.io/t3x-nr-llm/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

87Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

84Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
1.8/2.5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Silver
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate8.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, 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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages10
unassessed_packages15
affected_by_severitynone
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 10 resolved dependencies against OSV. 15 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.

77Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.ddev/AGENTS.md, .ddev/CLAUDE.md, .ddev/GEMINI.md, .github/workflows/AGENTS.md, .github/workflows/CLAUDE.md, .github/workflows/GEMINI.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, Classes/AGENTS.md, Classes/CLAUDE.md, Classes/GEMINI.md, Configuration/AGENTS.md, Configuration/CLAUDE.md, Configuration/GEMINI.md, Documentation/AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, Resources/AGENTS.md, Resources/CLAUDE.md, Resources/GEMINI.md, Tests/AGENTS.md, Tests/CLAUDE.md, Tests/GEMINI.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history99 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files.ddev/AGENTS.md, .ddev/CLAUDE.md, .ddev/GEMINI.md, .github/workflows/AGENTS.md, .github/workflows/CLAUDE.md, .github/workflows/GEMINI.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, Classes/AGENTS.md, Classes/CLAUDE.md, Classes/GEMINI.md, Configuration/AGENTS.md, Configuration/CLAUDE.md, Configuration/GEMINI.md, Documentation/AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, Resources/AGENTS.md, Resources/CLAUDE.md, Resources/GEMINI.md, Tests/AGENTS.md, Tests/CLAUDE.md, Tests/GEMINI.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes13,459
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
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
53.9/55Manageable file sizes20/1,032 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes208,619
source_files_sampled1,032
oversized_source_files20

Key facts

4GitHub stars
2contributors
1,750commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
43releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npm, Packagistpackage ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 4 ★ / 1 ⇿
4Stars
1Forks
34Releases

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.

012344112026-012026-042026-07
Major 0Minor 15Patch 19
OpenSSF Scorecard 8.4 / 10
8.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-22 06:09 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
7CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Silver
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistnetresearch/nr-vault^0.10.1 || ^0.11.0composer.json
Packagistpsr/http-client^1.0composer.json
Packagistpsr/http-factory^1.0composer.json
Packagistpsr/log^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/yaml^6.4 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-core^13.4 || ^14.3composer.json
All dependencies 25

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 19 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistnetresearch/nr-vaultdirect
Packagistpsr/http-clientdirect
Packagistpsr/http-factorydirect
Packagistpsr/logdirect
Packagistsymfony/yamldirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-coredirect
npm@axe-core/playwright4.12.1indirect
npm@playwright/test1.61.1indirect
npm@types/node24.13.3indirect
npmaxe-core4.12.1indirect
npmfsevents2.3.2indirect
npmplaywright1.61.1indirect
npmplaywright-core1.61.1indirect
npmundici-types7.18.2indirect
Packagistergebnis/composer-normalizeindirect
Packagistfakerphp/fakerindirect
Packagistgiorgiosironi/erisindirect
Packagistnetresearch/typo3-ci-workflowsindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagisttpwd/ke_searchindirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-dashboardindirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-indexed-searchindirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-installindirect
PyPIsentence-transformers5.6.0indirect
PyPItorch2.13.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 10 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 15 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 v0.26.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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