Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-12 07:21 UTC

wotzebra / laravel-swagger-ui

Add Swagger UI to a Laravel application.

PHPMIT★ 282 stars⑂ 38 forkssince Oct 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

wotzebra/laravel-swagger-ui holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (72/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (32/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
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.

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

Ownership

Who Owns The ZebraOrganization
8 followers43 public repossince Oct 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistwotz/laravel-swagger-ui2.1.030,73521146 days agolaravelswaggerswagger-uiopenapi

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

70Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence4/52 weeks with commits
12.2/18Commit volume22 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year22
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year4
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases22 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~97.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tag2.1.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases97.2
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?

63Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
39.7/60Stars282 stars
13.1/25Forks38 forks
5/15Watchers9 watchers
Inputs used
forks38
stars282
watchers9
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
59.8/80Monthly downloads30,735 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageswotz/laravel-swagger-ui
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads461,198
monthly_downloads30,735
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 85% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth12 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled12
top_contributor_share0.85
How it's scored
30.2/42Issue resolution72% of issues closed
27/30PR acceptance27/30 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs27
open_issues7
closed_issues18
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.72
closed_unmerged_prs3
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
6.9/25Owner reach8 followers of wotzebra
17.6/25Track record43 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers8
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginwotzebra
public_repos43
account_age_days1,028
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 146 days ago
20/20Version history21 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageswotz/laravel-swagger-ui
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish146

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

72Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpcs.xml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests6 out of 7 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
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
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?

38Weak · 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-Tests6 out of 7 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
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
3/7.5Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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)
13.9/40Legible commit history26 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.26
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpcs.xml
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/38 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes10,843
source_files_sampled38
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)tests/testfiles/openapi.json, tests/testfiles/openapi.yaml
0/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filestests/testfiles/openapi.json, tests/testfiles/openapi.yaml
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

282GitHub stars
12contributors
22commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
22releases
1bus factor
7open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 38 ⇿
0Stars
38Forks
19Releases

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.

01325383622021-032023-102026-06
Major 2Minor 11Patch 6

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

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 · 2026-08-12 07:21 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
8CI-Tests6 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 5/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistlaravel/framework^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPackagist.