Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 20:02 UTC

twilio / twilio-csharp

Twilio C#/.NET Helper Library for .NET6+.

C#MIT★ 711 stars⑂ 319 forkssince Sep 2009View on GitHub ↗

twilio/twilio-csharp holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (91/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (58/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

94
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

TwilioOrganization · verified domain
967 followers239 public repossince Jul 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
NuGetTwilio8.0.1-3342 days agorestsmsvoicetelephonyphonetwiliotwimlvideowirelessapi

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

89Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
18.7/36Commit cadence — 27/52 weeks with commits
16.5/18Commit volume — 67 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year67
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year27

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~25.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag8.0.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases25.6
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?

91Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.3/60Stars — 711 stars
20.9/25Forks — 319 forks
10.9/15Watchers — 93 watchers
Inputs used
forks319
stars711
watchers93
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100

Community health

100Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io, sonarcloud.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Total downloads — 137,244,393 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesTwilio
dependents—
ecosystemsnuget
total_downloads137,244,393
monthly_downloads—
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?

87Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 23% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 68 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 13 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled68
top_contributor_share0.23
How it's scored
39.3/42Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
21.7/30PR acceptance — 308/426 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 18/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs308
open_issues26
closed_issues375
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d10
prs_decided_30d11
issue_closed_ratio0.935
closed_unmerged_prs118
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
20/20Verified domain
21.5/25Owner reach — 967 followers of twilio
25/25Track record — 239 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers967
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logintwilio
public_repos239
account_age_days6,256

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on nuget
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history — 334 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesTwilio
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

58Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 15 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstwilio, sms, voice, telephony, phone, twiml, video, wireless, api, mms
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

73Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
4.5/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests — 15 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 18/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 13 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
3.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
1/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 2
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages14
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 14 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.

68Good · 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://www.twilio.com/llms.txt)
21.9/40Legible commit history — 41 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://www.twilio.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.41
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackages.lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestssrc/Twilio/Twilio.csproj, test/Twilio.Benchmark/Twilio.Benchmark.csproj, test/Twilio.Test/Twilio.Test.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
53.9/55Manageable file sizes — 28/1,393 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes130,639
source_files_sampled1,393
oversized_source_files28
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

711GitHub stars
68contributors
67commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
100releases
3bus factor
26open issues
—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-16: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 711 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 709 ★ / 319 ⇿
709Stars
319Forks
99Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-16. 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.

0125250375500625750709313232009-092018-032026-08
Major 3Minor 32Patch 56

Each point covers 16 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.6 / 10
6.6aggregate

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 20:02 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
8CI-Tests15 out of 18 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 18/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 13 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
7Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
2SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 2
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetSystem.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt8.3.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.IdentityModel.Tokens8.3.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetSystem.Collections.Specialized4.3.0src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetSystem.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt8.3.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.IdentityModel.Tokens8.3.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetSystem.Collections.Specialized4.3.0src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetJWT1.3.4src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetSystem.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt8.3.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.IdentityModel.Tokens8.3.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetSystem.Collections.Specialized4.3.0src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NETFramework.ReferenceAssemblies1.0.0src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
NuGetjnm2.ReferenceAssemblies.net351.0.1src/Twilio/Twilio.csproj
All dependencies 14

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 6 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetjnm2.ReferenceAssemblies.net351.0.1direct
NuGetJWT1.3.4direct
NuGetMicrosoft.IdentityModel.Tokens8.3.1direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NETFramework.ReferenceAssemblies1.0.0direct
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1direct
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.3direct
NuGetSystem.Collections.Specialized4.3.0direct
NuGetSystem.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt8.3.1direct
NuGetBenchmarkDotNet0.13.3indirect
NuGetcoverlet.msbuild6.0.2indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.TestPlatform17.0.0indirect
NuGetMSTest.TestAdapter2.2.8indirect
NuGetNSubstitute4.2.2indirect
NuGetNUnitLite3.13.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 14 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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