Laravel Starter Kit Inertia Vue Laravel Package

Product Decisions This Supports

Bootstrap vs. build-from-scratch (the core decision). This is not a dependency you composer require and upgrade — it is an opinionated project scaffold you fork once and then own outright. The decision it informs is "do we spend 2–4 engineer-weeks wiring auth, routing contracts, linting, static analysis and CI conventions, or do we start from someone else's opinionated baseline?" That is a staffing/roadmap trade, not a procurement trade.

Stack commitment: Inertia + Vue as the SPA answer. Adopting this kit is a de facto decision to run server-driven SPA (Laravel controllers → Inertia → Vue pages) rather than (a) Livewire/Blade monolith or (b) a decoupled API + separate frontend repo. That choice has downstream consequences for hiring profile, deployment topology, and how much frontend/backend contract work you carry.

Scope of v1 authentication. Fortify is pre-wired with login, registration, password reset, email verification, and 2FA/TOTP. That lets you put 2FA and verification into the launch scope at near-zero cost — a meaningful roadmap and enterprise-sales checkbox that is otherwise routinely deferred.

Frontend/backend contract discipline. Wayfinder generates typed frontend functions from Laravel routes, so route/URL drift becomes a compile-time failure instead of a QA finding. This supports a decision to hold a stricter definition of done on frontend work and to reduce integration defects as team size grows.

Quality gates as a day-one default. Pest, Larastan, Pint, Rector, and a "every change must be programmatically tested" convention arrive pre-configured. This supports adopting a real CI gate on greenfield work instead of the usual "we'll add static analysis later" debt.

Whether to invest in AI-assisted delivery. The repo ships AGENTS.md, Laravel Boost MCP tooling, and domain skills (auth, routing, best practices) as first-class artifacts. If you are deciding whether to standardize on agent-assisted coding, this kit is a concrete, testable artifact for that pilot rather than a slide deck.

Onboarding and convention convergence. The Action pattern (app/Actions, single handle(), injected dependencies, DB::transaction() boundaries) gives new hires and contractors an unambiguous "where does logic go" answer. Supports decisions about contractor ramp time and multi-team consistency.

Concrete use cases worth evaluating it against: internal tools and admin dashboards, B2B SaaS MVPs and customer portals, anything where a Vue SPA is already the house style, and greenfield products where you expect to write 80%+ of the domain code yourself anyway.

When to Consider This Package

Consider it when:

• You are greenfield. Starter kits do not retrofit into an existing application — there is no migration path, only a diff you cherry-pick by hand.
• Vue 3 is already the team's frontend competency, and Inertia (not a decoupled API) is an acceptable architecture.
• You are comfortable forking and owning the code, with no expectation of vendor support, security backports, or an upgrade path.
• You want Fortify-based auth including 2FA without designing it, and you want the opinionated conventions (Actions, strict types, Pest, Larastan) imposed rather than debated.
• Your team is actively using AI coding assistants and would benefit from the shipped context files and Boost/MCP integration.
• You can run PHP 8.5 and Laravel 13 — i.e. you control your runtime and are willing to track a fast-moving stack.

Look elsewhere when:

• React or Svelte is the requirement — use the official Laravel React/Svelte starter kits instead of rewriting this one's frontend.
• You need a supported distribution. This is a personal/community-flavored project from a Laravel maintainer, not an official Laravel-org kit. There is no SLA, no CVE response commitment, and 84 stars / 0 dependents means a thin community, few Stack Overflow answers, and effectively a bus factor of one. If procurement or security review requires a supported vendor artifact, prefer the official Laravel starter kits or Jetstream.
• You need teams, roles/permissions, billing, or multi-tenancy out of the box — this kit gives you auth and scaffolding, not product features. Budget for Jetstream, a commercial starter, or custom work.
• You require stable, non-prerelease dependencies. Inertia v3, Wayfinder v0, laravel/mcp v0, and Boost v2 are early-version territory; if your org pins to conservative release channels, this kit fights you.
• The team has no Vue/Inertia depth. The conventions assume fluency; the kit removes typing, not learning curve.
• Livewire or a Blade monolith is the right architecture for the product. Choosing this kit to get "modern" is the wrong reason.

Read the low opportunity score correctly. 0 dependents is a measurement artifact — starter kits are never depended upon via Composer. But it is also an honest signal: this package does not compound value over time the way a library does. Its entire value is front-loaded into week one, and after the fork you are maintaining your own codebase. Judge it as a one-time accelerator, not a long-lived dependency bet.

How to Pitch It (Stakeholders)

To executives: This is a project template, not a vendor product. Adopting it converts roughly two to four engineer-weeks of undifferentiated setup work — authentication, email verification, two-factor, linting, static analysis, test harness, frontend/backend wiring — into a few days of review and customization. It gets 2FA and verified email into the launch scope instead of the backlog, and it imposes quality gates from commit one, which reduces the defect tail we usually pay for in months two through six. The trade is explicit: we fork the code and own it forever, with no support contract and no guarantee of security patches, on a fast-moving dependency set. The financial exposure is small and bounded — the cost of a two-day spike and, if we reject it, throwing the fork away.

To engineering: This is a Laravel 13 / PHP 8.5 / Inertia v3 / Vue starter from a Laravel core maintainer. It encodes opinions most teams argue about for a sprint: business logic in app/Actions with a single handle() and transaction boundaries, strict types and explicit return types everywhere, Pest for tests with a "every change is tested" rule, Larastan and Rector and Pint pre-configured, Fortify for the full auth surface, and Wayfinder so frontend route calls are typed and tree-shaken rather than hardcoded strings. It also ships AGENTS.md and Boost MCP skills, so an AI assistant working in this repo gets version-specific conventions instead of guessing. The costs are real: Inertia v3, Wayfinder v0 and laravel/mcp v0 are early-version, the community around this specific kit is tiny, and once we fork, upgrades are our problem — not composer update.

Recommended path to a decision: timebox a one-to-two-day spike. Fork it, stand it up in our environment, and build one real vertical slice — schema, action, controller, Inertia page, Wayfinder route, Pest feature test — end to end. Compare against the official Laravel Vue starter kit on the same slice. Decide on measured setup time and how the conventions feel in our hands, not on star count. Do not treat 84 stars as a quality verdict; treat the absence of a support commitment as the actual risk item, and accept it deliberately or not at all.