Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 18:28 UTC

woocommerce / action-scheduler

A scalable, traceable job queue for background processing large queues of tasks in WordPress. Specifically designed for distribution in WordPress plugins (and themes) - no server access required.

PHPGPL-3.0★ 722 stars⑂ 136 forkssince Dec 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindPluginLibraryhow this is determined

woocommerce/action-scheduler holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (93/100) and lowest on Security (67/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

92
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

92
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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

WooOrganization
1,059 followers248 public repossince Nov 2010

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistwoocommerce/action-scheduler4.1.0357,9125837 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence — 20/52 weeks with commits
14.8/18Commit volume — 44 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 29 commit(s) and 17 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year44
human_commit_share0.93
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 50 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 37 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~94.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count50
latest_release_tag4.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release37
mean_days_between_releases94.7

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

69Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.4/60Stars — 722 stars
17.8/25Forks — 136 forks
11/15Watchers — 97 watchers
Inputs used
forks136
stars722
watchers97
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (GPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, travis-ci.org
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
74.1/80Monthly downloads — 357,912 downloads/month across packagist
12.2/20Registry dependents — 66 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageswoocommerce/action-scheduler
dependents66
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads8,487,903
monthly_downloads357,912
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

83Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 88 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 18 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled88
top_contributor_share0.242
How it's scored
38.1/42Issue resolution — 91% of issues closed
25.6/30PR acceptance — 592/695 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 13/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs592
open_issues61
closed_issues605
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d6
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.908
closed_unmerged_prs103
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
21.8/25Owner reach — 1,059 followers of woocommerce
25/25Track record — 248 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,059
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginwoocommerce
public_repos248
account_age_days5,786

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 37 days ago
20/20Version history — 58 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageswoocommerce/action-scheduler
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish37

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

93Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — phpcs.xml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://actionscheduler.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaction-scheduler, wordpress, wordpress-development
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://actionscheduler.org
docs_sitehttps://actionscheduler.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

67Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 29 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 13/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 18 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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 29 commit(s) and 17 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
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_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Token-Permissions. 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_packages41
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 41 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.

70Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
35/40Legible commit history — 61 of 93 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.656
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes29,525
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — phpcs.xml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
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
lockfilescomposer.lock, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
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 — 0/137 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes44,131
source_files_sampled137
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

722GitHub stars
88contributors
44commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
50releases
3bus factor
61open issues
npm, Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-06: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 722 stars today.
  • Could not fetch npm package 'action-scheduler' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 718 ★ / 136 ⇿
718Stars
136Forks
49Releases

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 2026-07-06. 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.

0125250375500625750718132102013-122020-032026-07
Major 2Minor 10Patch 33

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 18:27 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
9CI-Tests29 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 13/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 18 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained29 commit(s) and 17 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistdealerdirect/phpcodesniffer-composer-installer1.2.1indirect
Packagistdoctrine/instantiator1.5.0indirect
Packagistmustache/mustache2.14.2indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.13.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/manifest2.0.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/version3.2.1indirect
Packagistphpcompatibility/php-compatibility9.3.5indirect
Packagistphpcompatibility/phpcompatibility-paragonie1.3.4indirect
Packagistphpcompatibility/phpcompatibility-wp2.1.8indirect
Packagistphpcsstandards/phpcsextra1.5.1indirect
Packagistphpcsstandards/phpcsutils1.2.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage7.0.17indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator2.0.6indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template1.2.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer2.1.4indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-token-stream3.1.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit8.5.52indirect
Packagistrmccue/requests1.8.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit-reverse-lookup1.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator3.0.7indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff3.0.6indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment4.2.5indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter3.1.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state3.0.6indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator3.0.5indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-reflector1.1.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context3.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/resource-operations2.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/type1.1.5indirect
Packagistsebastian/version2.0.1indirect
Packagistsirbrillig/phpcs-changed2.13.0indirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesniffer3.13.6indirect
Packagistsymfony/finder4.4.44indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php801.32.0indirect
Packagisttheseer/tokenizer1.3.1indirect
Packagistwoocommerce/woocommerce-sniffs1.0.1indirect
Packagistwp-cli/mustangostang-spyc0.6.3indirect
Packagistwp-cli/php-cli-tools0.11.22indirect
Packagistwp-cli/wp-cli2.5.0indirect
Packagistwp-coding-standards/wpcs3.4.1indirect
Packagistyoast/phpunit-polyfills2.0.4indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 41 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 — Packagist.