Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 04:31 UTC

openapi / openapi-php-sdk

🐘 A fully-featured and blazing-fast PHP API client to interact with @Openapi®

PHP · MakefileMIT★ 17 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Oct 2025View on GitHub ↗

openapi/openapi-php-sdk holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Security (43/100). It was last updated 76 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

65
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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Openapi®Organization · verified domain
79 followers26 public repossince Oct 2025

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

55Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 76 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
15.7/18Commit volume55 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year55
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push76
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases2 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 128 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~150 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tag1.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release128
mean_days_between_releases150
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?

52Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
19.5/60Stars17 stars
0/25Forks2 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars17
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
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_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
44.4/80Monthly downloads2,135 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesopenapi/openapi-sdk
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads6,935
monthly_downloads2,135
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 46% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth10 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled10
top_contributor_share0.457
How it's scored
4.7/42Issue resolution11% of issues closed
27/30PR acceptance9/10 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs9
open_issues24
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.111
closed_unmerged_prs1
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
20/20Verified domain
13.7/25Owner reach79 followers of openapi
12.2/25Track record26 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers79
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginopenapi
public_repos26
account_age_days328

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 128 days ago
20/20Version history10 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesopenapi/openapi-sdk
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish128

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://console.openapi.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics18 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsapi-marketplace, certified-api, curl, laravel, openapi, php, php-sdk, symfony, api-client, rest-api, http-client, libcurl, crm, magento2, prestashop, suitecrm, woocommerce, yii2-framework
has_wikino
homepagehttps://console.openapi.com
docs_sitehttps://console.openapi.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

43Weak · 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
1.2/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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.

71Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history98 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.98
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes2,763
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configphpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
4/10Demonstrated agent practice2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/19 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes3,086
source_files_sampled19
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 examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

17GitHub stars
10contributors
55commits, last 12 months
76days since last push
2releases
2bus factor
24open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks

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.

111222212025-122026-022026-03
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 04:31 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
5CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 2/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistpsr/http-client^1.0composer.json
All dependencies 8

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistpsr/http-clientdirect
Packagistext-curlindirect
Packagistext-jsonindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesnifferindirect
Packagistsymfony/dotenvindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statisticsPackagist.