Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 23:20 UTC

spatie / laravel-model-states

State support for models

PHPMIT★ 1,304 stars⑂ 106 forkssince Sep 2019View on GitHub ↗

spatie/laravel-model-states holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (43/100). It was last updated 52 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SpatieOrganization
3,845 followers529 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-model-states2.14.2459,2196352 days agostatespatie

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

61Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 52 days ago
6.2/36Commit cadence — 9/52 weeks with commits
13.9/18Commit volume — 34 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year34
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push52
active_weeks_last_year9
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 63 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 52 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~54.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count63
latest_release_tag2.14.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release52
mean_days_between_releases54.2
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?

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
50.5/60Stars — 1,304 stars
16.8/25Forks — 106 forks
6.8/15Watchers — 18 watchers
Inputs used
forks106
stars1,304
watchers18
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
75.5/80Monthly downloads — 459,219 downloads/month across packagist
11.5/20Registry dependents — 52 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesspatie/laravel-model-states
dependents52
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads8,268,761
monthly_downloads459,219
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

73Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 41% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 55 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled55
top_contributor_share0.409
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
24.6/30PR acceptance — 141/172 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs141
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs31
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,845 followers of spatie
25/25Track record — 529 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,845
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginspatie
public_repos529
account_age_days4,509

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 52 days ago
20/20Version history — 63 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesspatie/laravel-model-states
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish52

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://spatie.be/docs/laravel-model-states
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, eloquent, states
has_wikino
homepagehttps://spatie.be/docs/laravel-model-states
docs_sitehttps://spatie.be/docs/laravel-model-states
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 10 out of 10 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
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 3/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 14 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
1.5/7.5Maintained — 3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
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_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.6
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.

43Weak · 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://spatie.be/llms.txt)
21.9/40Legible commit history — 39 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://spatie.be/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.411
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
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 5 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.05
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/111 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes15,737
source_files_sampled111
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,304GitHub stars
55contributors
34commits, last 12 months
52days since last push
63releases
2bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-10: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 1304 stars today.
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 1,296 ★ / 106 ⇿
1,296Stars
106Forks
63Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-10. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

02505007501,0001,2501,5001,296104122019-092023-022026-08
Major 2Minor 24Patch 37

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 23:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
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 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistfacade/ignition-contracts^1.0.2|^2.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/contracts^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/database^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-tools^1.19composer.json
Packagistspatie/php-attribute-reader^1.0composer.json
Packagistspatie/php-structure-discoverer^2.3.1composer.json
All dependencies 12

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistfacade/ignition-contracts—direct
Packagistilluminate/contracts—direct
Packagistilluminate/database—direct
Packagistilluminate/support—direct
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-tools—direct
Packagistspatie/php-attribute-reader—direct
Packagistspatie/php-structure-discoverer—direct
Packagistext-json—indirect
Packagistorchestra/testbench—indirect
Packagistpestphp/pest—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistsymfony/var-dumper—indirect
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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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