Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 07:07 UTC

DynamoDS / Dynamo

Open Source Graphical Programming for Computational Design and Automation

HTML · C#Apache-2.0★ 1,995 stars⑂ 675 forkssince Feb 2012View on GitHub ↗
#dynamo#dynamo-api#programmers#visualprogramming#bim#revit#automation

DynamoDS/Dynamo holds a health index of 95 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (95/100) and lowest on Security (45/100). It was last updated today. 6 contributors account for most of its recent work.

95
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

95
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 82 is calibrated to 95 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Dynamo TeamOrganization
328 followers52 public repossince Jan 2014

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

95Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

99Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
35.3/36Commit cadence — 51/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 412 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year412
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year51

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 73 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 27 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~30.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count73
latest_release_tagv4.1.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release27
mean_days_between_releases30.6

Community & Adoption

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

88Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

90Excellent
How it's scored
53.5/60Stars — 1,995 stars
23.6/25Forks — 675 forks
12.7/15Watchers — 192 watchers
Inputs used
forks675
stars1,995
watchers192
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

92Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

92Excellent
How it's scored
48.6/54Bus factor — 6 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 12% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor6
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.116

Issue & PR responsiveness

92Excellent
How it's scored
40.7/42Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
24/30PR acceptance — 9,874/12,366 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs9,874
open_issues127
closed_issues4,129
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.97
closed_unmerged_prs2,492
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

91Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
18.1/25Owner reach — 328 followers of DynamoDS
24.6/25Track record — 52 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers328
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginDynamoDS
public_repos52
account_age_days4,552
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

74Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 18 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://dynamobim.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdynamo, dynamo-api, programmers, visualprogramming, bim, revit, automation
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://dynamobim.org
docs_sitehttps://dynamobim.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

45Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

45Weak
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — dangerous workflow patterns detected
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 — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
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 — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,256
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

30At Risk
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency 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_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — HTML without a type-check config
52.6/55Manageable file sizes — 75/1,749 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageHTML
largest_source_bytes514,378
source_files_sampled1,749
oversized_source_files75

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples, samples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, samples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

1,995GitHub stars
100contributors
412commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
73releases
6bus factor
127open issues
—package ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 07:06 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 105

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 105 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetArchiMetrics.Analysis0.7.0.0indirect
NuGetAutodesk.IDSDK1.2.5indirect
NuGetAvalonEdit6.3.0.90indirect
NuGetBSortMembers0.0.1indirect
NuGetCastle.Core5.1.1indirect
NuGetCommandLineParser2.8.0indirect
NuGetCommandLineParser2.9.1indirect
NuGetcoverlet.collector3.1.2indirect
NuGetCsvHelper30.0.1indirect
NuGetCyotek.Drawing.BitmapFont2.0.0indirect
NuGetDiffPlex1.6.3indirect
NuGetDocumentFormat.OpenXml2.12.3indirect
NuGetDotNetProjects.Extended.Wpf.Toolkit5.0.103indirect
NuGetDynamicLanguageRuntime1.2.2indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.Analytics4.2.4.12843indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.Core—indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.DynamoAssistant0.3.2indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.DynamoCoreNodes—indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.DynamoMCP0.5.3indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.DynamoServices—indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.LibG_231_0_04.0.0.5336indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.LibG_232_0_04.0.0.5334indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.LibG_232_0_0_debug4.0.0.5334indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.PythonEngine.PythonNet31.4.8indirect
NuGetDynamoVisualProgramming.ZeroTouchLibrary—indirect
NuGetFontAwesome52.1.11indirect
NuGetForgeUnits.NET5.3.2indirect
NuGetForgeUnits.Schemas1.0.4indirect
NuGetGreg3.0.2.6284indirect
NuGetGreg3.0.2.8780indirect
NuGetHelixToolkit2.24.0indirect
NuGetHelixToolkit.Core.Wpf2.24.0indirect
NuGetHelixToolkit.SharpDX.Core.Wpf2.24.0indirect
NuGetHtmlSanitizer5.0.372indirect
NuGetJUnitTestLogger1.1.0indirect
NuGetJunitXml.TestLogger3.0.124indirect
NuGetLaunchDarkly.ClientSdk5.1.0indirect
NuGetLiveChartsCore2.0.0-rc3.3indirect
NuGetLiveChartsCore.SkiaSharpView.WPF2.0.0-rc3.3indirect
NuGetLucene.Net4.8.0-beta00016indirect
NuGetLucene.Net.Analysis.Common4.8.0-beta00016indirect
NuGetLucene.Net.QueryParser4.8.0-beta00016indirect
NuGetMagick.NET-Q8-AnyCPU14.12.0indirect
NuGetMagick.NET.Core14.12.0indirect
NuGetMarkdig0.22.0indirect
NuGetMIConvexHull—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis4.8.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.Common1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.Common3.11.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp3.11.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Workspaces1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.PublicApiAnalyzers3.3.4indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.VisualBasic1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.VisualBasic.Workspaces1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.Workspaces.Common1.0.0-rc3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Composition1.0.30indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.7.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.DotNet.PlatformAbstractions3.1.6indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.Json6.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions6.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.3.2indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Office.Interop.Excel15.0.4795.1000indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Office.Interop.Excel15.0.4795.1001indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.VisualBasic10.3.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Web.WebView21.0.2478.35indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Win32.Registry4.7.0indirect
NuGetMimeMapping2.0.0indirect
NuGetMono.Cecil0.11.4indirect
NuGetMoq4.18.4indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.1indirect
NuGetNUnit3.13.3indirect
NuGetNUnit.Analyzers3.3.0indirect
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter4.2.1indirect
NuGetPerfolizer0.2.1indirect
NuGetPrism.Core8.1.97indirect
NuGetRestSharp112.0.0indirect
NuGetRestSharp.Serializers.NewtonsoftJson106.12.0indirect
NuGetRoslyn.Compilers.Common1.2.20906.2indirect
NuGetRoslyn.Compilers.CSharp1.2.20906.2indirect
NuGetRoslyn.Services.Common1.2.20906.2indirect
NuGetRoslyn.Services.CSharp1.2.20906.2indirect
NuGetSharpDX4.2.0indirect
NuGetSharpDX.D3DCompiler4.2.0indirect
NuGetSharpDX.Direct2D14.2.0indirect
NuGetSharpDX.Direct3D114.2.0indirect
NuGetSharpDX.Direct3D94.2.0indirect
NuGetSharpDX.DXGI4.2.0indirect
NuGetSharpDX.Mathematics4.2.0indirect
NuGetStarMath—indirect
NuGetSystem.CodeDom6.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Collections.Immutable1.1.36indirect
NuGetSystem.Collections.Immutable8.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.ComponentModel.Composition8.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Configuration.ConfigurationManager5.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Data.DataSetExtensions4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Diagnostics.PerformanceCounter7.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Drawing.Common6.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Management8.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Reflection.Emit4.7.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Reflection.Metadata1.0.21indirect
NuGetSystem.Reflection.MetadataLoadContext8.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Resources.Extensions5.0.0indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with DynamoDS/Dynamo. Read them side by side →

87datadrivenconstruction/OpenConstructionERPOpen-source construction ERP - BOQ, PDF/CAD/BIM takeoff, AI cost matching. 42 regional catalogues, 21 languages, 71 modules. AGPL-3.0. v3.0 - pip install openconstructionerpExcellent100PrefectHQ/prefectPrefect is a workflow orchestration framework for building resilient data pipelines in Python.Exceptional100psf/blackThe uncompromising Python code formatterExceptional100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional99astral-sh/ruffAn extremely fast Python linter and code formatter, written in Rust.Exceptional99puppeteer/puppeteerJavaScript API for Chrome and FirefoxExceptional

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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