Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 02:36 UTC

prometheus / client_rust

Prometheus / OpenMetrics client library in Rust

RustApache-2.0★ 606 stars⑂ 111 forkssince Dec 2020View on GitHub ↗

prometheus/client_rust holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (81/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (70/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

89
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.

89
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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PrometheusOrganization · verified domain
4,750 followers58 public repossince Jan 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.ioprometheus-client0.25.13,002,751244 days agoinstrumentationmetricsmonitoringopenmetricsprometheus
crates.ioprometheus-client-derive-encode0.5.12,695,82254 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 4 days ago
13.2/36Commit cadence19/52 weeks with commits
14.1/18Commit volume36 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained26 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year36
human_commit_share0.82
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year19
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases28 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 4 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~115.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count28
latest_release_tagv0.25.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases115.8
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?

81Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.1/60Stars606 stars
17/25Forks111 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks111
stars606
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads5,698,573 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesprometheus-client, prometheus-client-derive-encode
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads76,990,450
monthly_downloads5,698,573
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?

72Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 71% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth44 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 12 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled44
top_contributor_share0.71
How it's scored
20.7/42Issue resolution49% of issues closed
19.8/30PR acceptance152/230 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 16/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs152
open_issues44
closed_issues43
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.494
closed_unmerged_prs78
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
25/25Owner reach4,750 followers of prometheus
24.9/25Track record58 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers4,750
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginprometheus
public_repos58
account_age_days4,971

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable2 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 4 days ago
20/20Version history24 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesprometheus-client, prometheus-client-derive-encode
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/prometheus-client
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsopenmetrics, metrics, prometheus, instrumentation, monitoring
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/prometheus-client
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

74Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 16/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 12 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained26 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
4/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
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
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0/7.5Vulnerabilities14 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate7.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

70Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history81 of 82 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.988
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml, derive-encode/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance18 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, derive-encode/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.18
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
53.1/55Manageable file sizes1/29 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes71,758
source_files_sampled29
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)src/encoding/proto/metrics.proto, src/encoding/proto/openmetrics_data_model.proto
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filessrc/encoding/proto/metrics.proto, src/encoding/proto/openmetrics_data_model.proto
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

606GitHub stars
44contributors
36commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
28releases
1bus factor
44open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 111 ⇿
0Stars
111Forks
23Releases

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.

02040608010012011132021-102024-022026-06
Major 0Minor 13Patch 8

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.4 / 10
7.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-06 02:36 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-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 16/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 12 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained26 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities14 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iodtoa1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioitoa1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioparking_lot0.12Cargo.toml
crates.ioprometheus-client-derive-encode0.5.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioprost0.14Cargo.toml
crates.ioprost-types0.14Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro21derive-encode/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote1derive-encode/Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn3derive-encode/Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 statisticscrates.io.