Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 18:29 UTC

usernotnull / tall-toasts

A Toast notification library for the Laravel TALL stack. You can push notifications from the backend or frontend to render customizable toasts with almost zero footprint on the published CSS/JS 🔥🚀

PHP · Blade · JavaScriptMIT★ 572 stars⑂ 38 forkssince Oct 2021View on GitHub ↗

usernotnull/tall-toasts holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (72/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (32/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

59
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.

59
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

usernotnullPersonal account
27 followers2 public repossince Nov 2015

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

47Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 5 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits, discounted for automation: 4 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 522 days
1.3/18Commit volume24 commits in the last year, discounted for automation: 4 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 522 days
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year24
human_commit_share0.04
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases17 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 549 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~124.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count17
latest_release_tagv2.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release549
mean_days_between_releases124.4
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?

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.7/60Stars572 stars
13.1/25Forks38 forks
3.9/15Watchers6 watchers
Inputs used
forks38
stars572
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
51.3/80Monthly downloads6,994 downloads/month across packagist
4/20Registry dependents3 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesusernotnull/tall-toasts
dependents3
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads431,357
monthly_downloads6,994
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

51Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 88% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.881
How it's scored
37.2/42Issue resolution88% of issues closed
16.8/30PR acceptance366/654 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs366
open_issues3
closed_issues23
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.885
closed_unmerged_prs288
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, OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
10.4/25Owner reach27 followers of usernotnull
15.5/25Track record2 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers27
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginusernotnull
public_repos2
account_age_days3,960
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 549 days ago
20/20Version history17 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesusernotnull/tall-toasts
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish549

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

72Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.js, .php-cs-fixer.dist.php
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests13 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics10 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstoast, toast-notifications, toasts, notifications, laravel, laravel-package, tailwindcss, alpinejs, livewire, livewire-component
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?

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
2/2.5CI-Tests13 out of 15 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
0/7.5Code-Reviewno data
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Code-Review, 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.

32At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.js, .php-cs-fixer.dist.php
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance48 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_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.48
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 sizes0/32 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes3,716
source_files_sampled32
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

572GitHub stars
5contributors
24commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
17releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npm, Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'tall-toasts' from its registry
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 38 ⇿
0Stars
38Forks
16Releases

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.

01325383532021-102024-032026-07
Major 1Minor 9Patch 6

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 · 2026-09-05 18:28 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
8CI-Tests13 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
n/aCode-ReviewFound no human activity in the last 15 changesets
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/contracts^8.15 || 9.0 - 9.34 || ^9.36 || ^10.0|^11.0|^12.0composer.json
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-tools^1.93composer.json
Packagistlivewire/livewire^v3composer.json
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 28 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/contractsdirect
Packagistlivewire/livewiredirect
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-toolsdirect
npm@babel/core^7.29indirect
npm@babel/plugin-proposal-object-rest-spread^7.20indirect
npm@babel/preset-env^7.28indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-alias^5.1indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-babel^6.1indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-commonjs^25.0indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-node-resolve^15.3indirect
npmcore-js^3.50indirect
npmfs-extra^11.4indirect
npmget-value^3.0indirect
npmmd5^2.3indirect
npmrollup^2.79indirect
npmrollup-plugin-filesize^10.0indirect
npmrollup-plugin-output-manifest^2.0indirect
npmrollup-plugin-terser^7.0indirect
npmwhatwg-fetch^3.6indirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixerindirect
Packagistlaravel/pintindirect
Packagistnunomaduro/collisionindirect
Packagistnunomaduro/larastanindirect
Packagistorchestra/testbenchindirect
Packagistpestphp/pestindirect
Packagistpestphp/pest-plugin-laravelindirect
Packagistpestphp/pest-plugin-parallelindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpmd/phpmdindirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesnifferindirect
Packagistvimeo/psalmindirect
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 statisticsPackagist.