Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-11 08:32 UTC

qase-tms / qase-api-client

Qase TestOps API V1 client for PHP

PHPApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jan 2025View on GitHub ↗

qase-tms/qase-api-client holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (68/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (38/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
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.

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

Ownership

Qase TMSOrganization
85 followers92 public repossince Jun 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistqase/qase-api-client1.1.1427,3681535 days agophpapiclienttmsqase

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

68Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
10/18Commit volume12 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year12
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases16 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 35 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~36.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tagv1.1.14
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release35
mean_days_between_releases36.4
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?

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
59.2/80Monthly downloads27,368 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesqase/qase-api-client
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads111,916
monthly_downloads27,368
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
28.4/30PR acceptance18/19 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 8/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs18
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio
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): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
13.9/25Owner reach85 followers of qase-tms
25/25Track record92 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers85
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginqase-tms
public_repos92
account_age_days2,610
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 35 days ago
20/20Version history15 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesqase/qase-api-client
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish35

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests14 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

44Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.8/2.5CI-Tests14 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 8/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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
1.5/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
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
4.5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
13.1/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: guzzlehttp/guzzle 7.10.0 (high 7.2), guzzlehttp/psr7 2.9.0 (moderate 5.3)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories13
affected_packages2
assessed_packages36
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 36 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

39Weak · 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 history18 of 20 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.9
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
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 20
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
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
53.3/55Manageable file sizes12/385 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes116,038
source_files_sampled385
oversized_source_files12

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
12commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
16releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.7 / 10
3.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-11 08:32 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
7CI-Tests14 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 8/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
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
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle^7.3composer.json
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr7^1.7 || ^2.0composer.json
All dependencies 36

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 34 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle7.10.0direct
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr72.9.0direct
Packagistdoctrine/instantiator1.5.0indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/promises2.3.0indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.13.4indirect
Packagistnikic/php-parser5.7.0indirect
Packagistphar-io/manifest2.0.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/version3.2.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage9.2.32indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator3.0.6indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-invoker3.1.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template2.0.4indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer5.0.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit9.6.34indirect
Packagistpsr/http-client1.0.3indirect
Packagistpsr/http-factory1.1.0indirect
Packagistpsr/http-message2.0indirect
Packagistralouphie/getallheaders3.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/cli-parser1.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit1.0.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit-reverse-lookup2.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator4.0.10indirect
Packagistsebastian/complexity2.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff4.0.6indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment5.1.5indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter4.0.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state5.0.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/lines-of-code1.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator4.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-reflector2.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context4.0.6indirect
Packagistsebastian/resource-operations3.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/type3.2.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/version3.0.2indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts2.5.4indirect
Packagisttheseer/tokenizer1.3.1indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 36 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
guzzlehttp/guzzle7.10.0directhigh98.0.1
guzzlehttp/psr72.9.0directmoderate42.12.3

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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