Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-21 10:59 UTC

Jebel-Quant / rhiza-task

The rhiza developer tasks as a pinned CLI: one set of task names across Python, Rust and Go, replacing a synced make layer

PythonMIT★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Aug 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolPluginLibraryhow this is determined

Jebel-Quant/rhiza-task holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (100/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (42/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Jebel QuantOrganization
24 followers29 public repossince Jun 2025

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIrhiza-task1.1.012,05070 days agocimakerhizatask-runneruv

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence1/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume118 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year118
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year1

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases7 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.5 days
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 10 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv1.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.5

Community & Adoption

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

42Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
54.4/80Monthly downloads12,050 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrhiza-task
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads12,050
unverified_packages_excluded
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance62/62 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs62
open_issues0
closed_issues61
prs_merged_7d58
prs_decided_7d58
prs_merged_30d58
prs_decided_30d58
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
10.1/25Owner reach24 followers of Jebel-Quant
13.1/25Track record29 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers24
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginJebel-Quant
public_repos29
account_age_days429
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history7 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrhiza-task
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

100Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configruff.toml
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests12 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://jebel-quant.github.io/rhiza-task/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics15 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsautomation, build-tools, ci, cli, code-quality, developer-tools, golang, make, makefile, python, rhiza, rust, task-runner, typer, uv
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://jebel-quant.github.io/rhiza-task/
docs_sitehttps://jebel-quant.github.io/rhiza-task/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

68Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests12 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
4/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
2/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
7.5/7.5Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 10 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate6.8

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.

73Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history96 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes25,300
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configruff.toml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice42 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.42
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
53.4/55Manageable file sizes1/35 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes84,707
source_files_sampled35
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

1GitHub stars
1contributors
118commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:rhiza-task@1.1.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.8 / 10
6.8aggregate

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 · 2026-08-21 10:59 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests12 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
8SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
10Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 10 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItyper>=0.15pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv>=1.0pyproject.toml
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 statisticsPyPI.