Public record
Software health reportschema 0.32.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-20 09:43 UTC

spatie / laravel-discord-alerts

Quickly send a message to Discord

PHPMIT★ 158 stars⑂ 27 forkssince Jan 2022View on GitHub ↗

spatie/laravel-discord-alerts holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (85/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (35/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

77
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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SpatieOrganization
3,824 followers526 public repossince May 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistspatie/laravel-discord-alerts1.9.137,79615155 days agolaravelspatielaravel-discord-alerts

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
6.2/36Commit cadence9/52 weeks with commits
11.5/18Commit volume18 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year18
human_commit_share0.73
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year9
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases16 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~124.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tag1.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases124.3
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.6/60Stars158 stars
11.8/25Forks27 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks27
stars158
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
61/80Monthly downloads37,796 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesspatie/laravel-discord-alerts
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads564,721
monthly_downloads37,796
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

85Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 41% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth21 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled21
top_contributor_share0.406
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
27.3/30PR acceptance50/55 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs50
open_issues0
closed_issues4
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs5
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
25/25Owner reach3,824 followers of spatie
25/25Track record526 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,824
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginspatie
public_repos526
account_age_days4,485
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 155 days ago
20/20Version history15 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesspatie/laravel-discord-alerts
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish155

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests13 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://spatie.be/open-source
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, php, discord, notification
has_wikino
homepagehttps://spatie.be/open-source
docs_sitehttps://spatie.be/open-source
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

49Weak · 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
1.8/2.5CI-Tests13 out of 17 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
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3/7.5Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
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
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
19.7/40Legible commit history27 of 73 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.37
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
0/10Reproducible environment
4/10Demonstrated agent practice2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance18 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.18
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/17 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes13,658
source_files_sampled17
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

158GitHub stars
21contributors
18commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
16releases
2bus factor
0open 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 ★ / 27 ⇿
0Stars
27Forks
13Releases

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.

0510152025302712022-022024-052026-08
Major 0Minor 8Patch 5

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-20 09:42 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
7CI-Tests13 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 6/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
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 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-tools^1.93.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/contracts^12.0|^13.0composer.json
All dependencies 9

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/contractsdirect
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-toolsdirect
Packagistlarastan/larastanindirect
Packagistnunomaduro/collisionindirect
Packagistorchestra/testbenchindirect
Packagistpestphp/pestindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installerindirect
Packagistspatie/laravel-rayindirect
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 v0.32.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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