10/10 points: Provide a valid pubspec.yaml

5/5 points: Provide a valid README.md

5/5 points: Provide a valid CHANGELOG.md

10/10 points: Use an OSI-approved license

Detected license: MIT.

10/10 points: 20% or more of the public API has dartdoc comments

230 out of 321 API elements (71.7 %) have documentation comments.

Some symbols that are missing documentation: layrz_ble, layrz_ble.BleAdapterOff, layrz_ble.BleAdapterOff.BleAdapterOff.new, layrz_ble.BleAdapterOn, layrz_ble.BleAdapterOn.BleAdapterOn.new.

10/10 points: Package has an example

20/20 points: Supports 6 of 6 possible platforms (iOS, Android, Web, Windows, macOS, Linux)

• ✓ Android

• ✓ iOS

• ✓ Windows

• ✓ Linux

• ✓ macOS

• ✓ Web

These issues are present but do not affect the score, because they may not originate in your package:

0/0 points: WASM compatibility

This package is compatible with runtime wasm, and will be rewarded additional points in a future version of the scoring model.

See https://dart.dev/web/wasm for details.

0/0 points: Swift Package Manager support

This iOS or macOS plugin supports the Swift Package Manager. It will be rewarded additional points in a future version of the scoring model.

See https://docs.flutter.dev/to/spm for details.

40/50 points: code has no errors, warnings, lints, or formatting issues

Found 4 issues. Showing the first 2:

10/10 points: All of the package dependencies are supported in the latest version

To reproduce run dart pub outdated --no-dev-dependencies --up-to-date --no-dependency-overrides.

10/10 points: Package supports latest stable Dart and Flutter SDKs

20/20 points: Compatible with dependency constraint lower bounds

pub downgrade does not expose any static analysis error.