Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-12 13:39 UTC

BottlecapDave / HomeAssistant-OctopusEnergy

Unofficial Home Assistant integration for interacting with Octopus Energy

PythonMIT★ 1,022 stars⑂ 114 forkssince Aug 2021View on GitHub ↗

BottlecapDave/HomeAssistant-OctopusEnergy holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Security (25/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

David KendallPersonal account
144 followers36 public repossince Oct 2015

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
23.5/36Commit cadence — 34/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 253 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year253
human_commit_share0.94
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year34

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 23 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~13.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv19.2.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release23
mean_days_between_releases13.3

Community & Adoption

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

72Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.8/60Stars — 1,022 stars
17.1/25Forks — 114 forks
8.1/15Watchers — 30 watchers
Inputs used
forks114
stars1,022
watchers30
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

59Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 45 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled45
top_contributor_share0.867
How it's scored
39.4/42Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance — 333/353 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 4/4 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs333
open_issues62
closed_issues955
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d8
prs_decided_30d8
issue_closed_ratio0.939
closed_unmerged_prs20
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d4
first_time_prs_decided_30d4
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
15.5/25Owner reach — 144 followers of BottlecapDave
23.4/25Track record — 36 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers144
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginBottlecapDave
public_repos36
account_age_days4,024
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://bottlecapdave.github.io/HomeAssistant-OctopusEnergy/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicshome-automation, home-assistant, octopus-energy, smart-home, energy-consumption
has_wikino
homepagehttps://bottlecapdave.github.io/HomeAssistant-OctopusEnergy/
docs_sitehttps://bottlecapdave.github.io/HomeAssistant-OctopusEnergy/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
25/25Dependency lockfiles — package-lock.json
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfilespackage-lock.json
manifestspackage.json, requirements.test.txt, requirements.txt
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno

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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 85 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.904
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — .build/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs.build/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (.build/tsconfig.json)
54.5/55Manageable file sizes — 3/324 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes108,090
source_files_sampled324
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

1,022GitHub stars
45contributors
253commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
62open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'octopusenergy' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 114 ⇿
0Stars
114Forks
100Releases

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.

02040608010012011332021-092024-032026-09
Major 8Minor 19Patch 37

Each point covers 5 days.

Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmgraphql^17.0.2package.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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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