Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 03:55 UTC

plivo / plivo-node

A Node library for communicating with the Plivo API and generating Plivo XML.

JavaScriptMIT★ 102 stars⑂ 66 forkssince Dec 2012View on GitHub ↗

plivo/plivo-node holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (82/100) and lowest on Security (48/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 6 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PlivoOrganization
112 followers108 public repossince May 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmplivo4.79.0181,71015484 days agoplivoplivo-xmlrestapitelephony

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

80Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
11.8/36Commit cadence — 17/52 weeks with commits
16.3/18Commit volume — 65 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year65
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year17

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 84 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~17.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv4.79.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release84
mean_days_between_releases17.8
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
32.5/60Stars — 102 stars
15.1/25Forks — 66 forks
8.8/15Watchers — 39 watchers
Inputs used
forks66
stars102
watchers39
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
70.1/80Monthly downloads — 181,710 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesplivo
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads181,710
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

82Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
48.6/54Bus factor — 6 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 18% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 70 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor6
contributors_sampled70
top_contributor_share0.183
How it's scored
37.7/42Issue resolution — 90% of issues closed
22.9/30PR acceptance — 206/270 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs206
open_issues9
closed_issues78
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.897
closed_unmerged_prs64
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
14.8/25Owner reach — 112 followers of plivo
25/25Track record — 108 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers112
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginplivo
public_repos108
account_age_days5,634

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 84 days ago
20/20Version history — 154 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesplivo
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish84

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc, package.json ("eslintConfig")
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 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
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://www.plivo.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmessaging, voice, plivo
has_wikino
homepagehttps://www.plivo.com
docs_sitehttps://www.plivo.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

48Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained — 4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
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
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
17.9/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: request 2.88.2 (moderate 6.1)
6.7/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 4 affected: form-data 2.3.3 (high 7.5), uuid 3.4.0 (high 7.5), qs 6.5.5 (moderate 5.3), +1 more
21.9/40No advisories left outstanding — 5 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,314 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories7
affected_packages5
assessed_packages102
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 3
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the npm:plivo@4.79.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 102 packages. 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.

68Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://www.plivo.com/llms.txt)
38.4/40Legible commit history — 72 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://www.plivo.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.72
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc, package.json ("eslintConfig")
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 22 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.22
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
54.6/55Manageable file sizes — 1/156 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes114,828
source_files_sampled156
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
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

102GitHub stars
70contributors
65commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
100releases
6bus factor
9open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 66 ⇿
0Stars
66Forks
97Releases

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.

01325385063756622012-122019-092026-05
Major 0Minor 56Patch 40

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 03:54 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
10CI-Tests9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
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
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@types/node^14.14.14package.json
npmaxios^1.8.3package.json
npmbase-64^0.1.0package.json
npmbuild-url^1.0.10package.json
npmform-data^4.0.0package.json
npmhttps-proxy-agent^5.0.0package.json
npmjoi^17.9.2package.json
npmjsonwebtoken^9.0.0package.json
npmlodash^4.17.4package.json
npmquerystring^0.2.0package.json
npmrequest^2.88.2package.json
npmuri-parser^1.0.0package.json
npmutf8^2.1.2package.json
npmxml2js^0.5.0package.json
npmxmlbuilder^9.0.1package.json
All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 15 direct and 27 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@types/node^14.14.14direct
npmaxios^1.8.3direct
npmbase-64^0.1.0direct
npmbuild-url^1.0.10direct
npmform-data^4.0.0direct
npmhttps-proxy-agent^5.0.0direct
npmjoi^17.9.2direct
npmjsonwebtoken^9.0.0direct
npmlodash^4.17.4direct
npmquerystring^0.2.0direct
npmrequest^2.88.2direct
npmuri-parser^1.0.0direct
npmutf8^2.1.2direct
npmxml2js^0.5.0direct
npmxmlbuilder^9.0.1direct
npm@babel/cli^7.28.6indirect
npm@babel/core^7.29.0indirect
npm@babel/preset-env^7.29.2indirect
npmbabel-cli^6.26.0indirect
npmbabel-core^6.26.3indirect
npmbabel-eslint^6.1.2indirect
npmbabel-preset-es2015^6.9.0indirect
npmbabel-preset-flow^6.23.0indirect
npmbabel-register^6.9.0indirect
npmdel^2.0.2indirect
npmeslint^3.19.0indirect
npmeslint-config-xo-space^0.15.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-babel^3.3.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-flowtype^2.33.0indirect
npmflow-bin^0.47.0indirect
npmgulp^4.0.2indirect
npmgulp-babel^6.1.2indirect
npmgulp-babel-istanbul^1.6.0indirect
npmgulp-eslint^3.0.1indirect
npmgulp-exclude-gitignore^1.0.0indirect
npmgulp-istanbul^1.0.0indirect
npmgulp-line-ending-corrector^1.0.1indirect
npmgulp-mocha^3.0.1indirect
npmgulp-plumber^1.0.0indirect
npmisparta^4.0.0indirect
npmmerge-stream^2.0.0indirect
npmsinon^2.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 5

Installing npm:plivo@4.79.0 pulls in 102 packages, direct and transitive: 5 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
form-data2.3.3indirecthigh24.0.6
uuid3.4.0indirecthigh113.0.1
request2.88.2directmoderate13.0.0
qs6.5.5indirectmoderate26.16.0
tough-cookie2.5.0indirectmoderate14.1.3

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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