Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 13:23 UTC

FrankC01 / pysui

SUI Python Client SDK

PythonApache-2.0★ 212 stars⑂ 63 forkssince Sep 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#blockchain#sdk-python#sui#client-sdk#python

FrankC01/pysui holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (93/100) and lowest on Security (43/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Frank V. CastellucciPersonal account
64 followers18 public repossince Sep 2013Axiom:1, Inc.

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIpysui1.2.0-740 days agosoftware-development-kitsuiblockchain

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

88Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
24.2/36Commit cadence — 35/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 207 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year207
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year35

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 68 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~24.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count68
latest_release_tagv1.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases24.2
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

55Moderate
How it's scored
37.7/60Stars — 212 stars
14.9/25Forks — 63 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks63
stars212
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

65Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

61Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

26At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 97% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 20 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled20
top_contributor_share0.971

Issue & PR responsiveness

77Good
How it's scored
41.6/42Issue resolution — 99% of issues closed
25.8/30PR acceptance — 43/50 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs43
open_issues3
closed_issues330
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.991
closed_unmerged_prs7
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

55Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
13/25Owner reach — 64 followers of FrankC01
21.3/25Track record — 18 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers64
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginFrankC01
public_repos18
account_age_days4,692
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 74 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespysui
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

30At Risk
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
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_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsblockchain, sdk-python, sui, client-sdk, python
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

43Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

43Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated11
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive7
scorecard_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
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—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

71Good
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — doc/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — pysui/sui/sui_grpc/suimsgs/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdoc/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspysui/sui/sui_grpc/suimsgs/py.typed
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

80Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (pysui/sui/sui_grpc/suimsgs/py.typed)
53.1/55Manageable file sizes — 5/147 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes213,202
source_files_sampled147
oversized_source_files5

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 — samples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
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

212GitHub stars
20contributors
207commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
68releases
1bus factor
3open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 13:22 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 13
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIbetterproto2< 1.0.0, >= 0.10.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdataclasses_json< 0.7.0, >= 0.6.6pyproject.toml
PyPIPyYAML< 6.2, >= 6.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx< 0.29, >=0.28.1pyproject.toml
PyPIh2< 5.0, >= 4.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIjsonschema< 4.30, >= 4.23.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwebsockets< 16.0.0, >=15.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPIgql>= 4.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyping_utils< 0.2.0, >=0.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIcanoser==0.8.2pyproject.toml
PyPIbase58< 2.2.0, >=2.1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIDeprecated< 1.4.0, >=1.3.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpysui-fastcrypto>= 0.7.3pyproject.toml
All dependencies 34

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 21 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbase58—direct
PyPIbetterproto2—direct
PyPIcanoser0.8.2direct
PyPIdataclasses-json—direct
PyPIdeprecated—direct
PyPIgql—direct
PyPIh2—direct
PyPIhttpx—direct
PyPIjsonschema—direct
PyPIpysui-fastcrypto—direct
PyPIpyyaml—direct
PyPItyping-utils—direct
PyPIwebsockets—direct
PyPIbetterproto2-compiler—indirect
PyPIbuild1.5.0indirect
PyPIdoc82.0.0indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIflake8-cognitive-complexity—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPIpydocstyle6.3.0indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.5indirect
PyPIpysui-crypto0.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-order—indirect
PyPIradon—indirect
PyPIrstcheck6.2.5indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsetuptools-scm—indirect
PyPIsphinx8.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme3.1.0indirect
PyPItwine6.2.0indirect
PyPItypes-deprecated1.3.1.20260520indirect
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 FrankC01/pysui. Read them side by side →

100optuna/optunaA hyperparameter optimization frameworkExceptional100open-telemetry/opentelemetry-pythonOpenTelemetry Python API and SDK Exceptional100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional100streamlit/streamlitStreamlit — A faster way to build and share data apps.Exceptional100numpy/numpyThe fundamental package for scientific computing with Python.Exceptional100deepset-ai/haystackOpen-source AI orchestration framework for building context-engineered, production-ready LLM applications. Design modular pipelines and agent workflows with explicit control over retrieval, routing, memory, and generation. Built for scalable agents, RAG, multimodal applications, semantic search, and conversational systems.Exceptional

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 — PyPI.