Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 22:59 UTC

sourcebroker / t3api

TYPO3 extension t3api. REST API for your TYPO3 project. Config with annotations, built in filtering, pagination, typolinks, image processing, uploads (FAL), serialization contexts, responses in Hydra/JSON-LD format. Api-platform based.

PHPGPL-2.0★ 38 stars⑂ 24 forkssince Aug 2019View on GitHub ↗
KindPluginLibraryhow this is determined

sourcebroker/t3api holds a health index of 56 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (73/100) and lowest on Security (37/100). It was last updated 46 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

56
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.

56
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 54 is calibrated to 56 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

InscriptOrganization
5 followers46 public repossince Oct 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistsourcebroker/t3api4.1.32,03241385 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

42Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 46 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence — 1/52 weeks with commits
2.7/18Commit volume — 1 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year1
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push46
active_weeks_last_year1
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 14 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 385 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~33.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tag4.1.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release385
mean_days_between_releases33.7
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?

58Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
25.4/60Stars — 38 stars
11.3/25Forks — 24 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks24
stars38
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (GPL-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_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesposer.pugx.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
44.1/80Monthly downloads — 2,032 downloads/month across packagist
4.7/20Registry dependents — 4 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagessourcebroker/t3api
dependents4
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads91,847
monthly_downloads2,032
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 50% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.504
How it's scored
34.3/42Issue resolution — 82% of issues closed
25.1/30PR acceptance — 46/55 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs46
open_issues11
closed_issues49
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.817
closed_unmerged_prs9
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
5.6/25Owner reach — 5 followers of sourcebroker
24.2/25Track record — 46 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers5
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginsourcebroker
public_repos46
account_age_days3,979
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 385 days ago
20/20Version history — 41 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessourcebroker/t3api
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish385

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

73Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
2/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstypo3-extension, typo3-cms-extension, rest-api, rest, hydra, json-ld, api-platform
has_wikino
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?

37Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.2/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
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 — 1 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
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 — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

42Weak · 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://docs.typo3.org/llms.txt)
14.4/40Legible commit history — 27 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.typo3.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.27
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — PHP without a type-check config
54.4/55Manageable file sizes — 2/188 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes1,403,039
source_files_sampled188
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

38GitHub stars
15contributors
1commits, last 12 months
46days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
11open issues
Packagistpackage 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 ★ / 24 ⇿
0Stars
24Forks
14Releases

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.

048121620242422019-092023-022026-06
Major 2Minor 1Patch 11

Each point covers 7 days.

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 · 2026-09-05 22:59 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
1CI-Tests3 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained1 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 13
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistdoctrine/annotations^1.13.3 || ^2.0composer.json
Packagistgoldspecdigital/oooas^2.4composer.json
Packagistjms/serializer^3.1composer.json
Packagistsymfony/cache^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/expression-language^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/http-foundation^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/mime^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/property-info^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/psr-http-message-bridge^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/routing^6.4 || ^7.0composer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-core^12.4.16 || ^13.3composer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-extbase^12.4.16 || ^13.3composer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-frontend^12.4.16 || ^13.3composer.json
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 statistics — Packagist.