Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-24 11:01 UTC

twilio / twilio-ruby

A Ruby gem for communicating with the Twilio API and generating TwiML

RubyMIT★ 1,390 stars⑂ 471 forkssince Sep 2009View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

twilio/twilio-ruby holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (94/100) and lowest on Security (53/100). It was last updated today. 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
962 followers238 public repossince Jul 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemstwilio-ruby7.11.1-3570 days ago

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 recencylast push 0 days ago
19.4/36Commit cadence28/52 weeks with commits
16.6/18Commit volume70 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year70
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year28

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~25.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag7.11.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases25.4
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?

94Exceptional · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51/60Stars1,390 stars
22.3/25Forks471 forks
10.4/15Watchers74 watchers
Inputs used
forks471
stars1,390
watchers74
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

100Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Total downloads132,665,684 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagestwilio-ruby
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads132,665,684
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?

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 17 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.244
How it's scored
39.1/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
23.1/30PR acceptance354/460 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 14/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs354
open_issues22
closed_issues296
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d13
prs_decided_30d13
issue_closed_ratio0.931
closed_unmerged_prs106
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 backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
21.5/25Owner reach962 followers of twilio
25/25Track record238 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers962
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logintwilio
public_repos238
account_age_days6,236

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history357 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestwilio-ruby
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests13 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.twilio.com/docs/libraries/reference/twilio-ruby/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstwilio, twiml, twilio-api
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://www.twilio.com/docs/libraries/reference/twilio-ruby/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests13 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 14/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 17 contributing companies or organizations
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
7.5/7.5Maintained14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
0.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 1
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities15 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
13.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: nokogiri 1.16.8 (high 7.8)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
33.5/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 551 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories15
affected_packages1
assessed_packages38
unassessed_packages11
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 38 resolved dependencies against OSV. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

62Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno 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)
20.3/40Legible commit history38 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_share0.38
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
53.5/55Manageable file sizes22/781 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes96,082
source_files_sampled781
oversized_source_files22
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
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

1,390GitHub stars
100contributors
70commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
3bus factor
22open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 471 ⇿
0Stars
471Forks
98Releases

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.

010020030040050046182009-092018-022026-07
Major 2Minor 27Patch 62

Each point covers 16 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-24 11:01 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
8CI-Tests13 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 14/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 17 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained14 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
1SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 1
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities15 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsbase64Gemfile
RubyGemsbenchmarkGemfile
RubyGemsnokogiri>= 1.6Gemfile
RubyGemsostructGemfile
RubyGemsrexmlGemfile
RubyGemsrubocop= 1.71.2Gemfile
All dependencies 49

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 42 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsbase640.3.0direct
RubyGemsbenchmark0.5.0direct
RubyGemsnokogiridirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.16.8direct
RubyGemsostruct0.6.3direct
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.71.2direct
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbundlerindirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsequivalent-xmlindirect
RubyGemsequivalent-xml0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsfakewebindirect
RubyGemsfakeweb1.3.0indirect
RubyGemsfaradayindirect
RubyGemsfaraday2.14.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.2indirect
RubyGemsjwtindirect
RubyGemsjwt3.2.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemsloggerindirect
RubyGemslogger1.4.4indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.9indirect
RubyGemsnet-http0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.28.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.12.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrackindirect
RubyGemsrack2.2.23indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsrspecindirect
RubyGemsrspec3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.8indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov1.0.3indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsyardindirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.45indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 38 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
nokogiri1.16.8directhigh151.19.4

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 statisticsRubyGems.