Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 21:25 UTC

Lancetnik / FastDepends

FastDepends - FastAPI Dependency Injection system extracted from FastAPI and cleared of all HTTP logic. Async and sync modes are both supported.

PythonMIT★ 517 stars⑂ 33 forkssince Apr 2023View on GitHub ↗

Lancetnik/FastDepends holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on Security (59/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Pastukhov NikitaPersonal account
317 followers56 public repossince Oct 2018@ag2ai

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
PyPIfast-depends3.0.81,974,84678178 days agofastapidependency-injection

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

91Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 3 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence42/52 weeks with commits
17.3/18Commit volume83 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained16 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year83
human_commit_share0.3
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year42
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases38 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 178 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~22.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count38
latest_release_tag3.0.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release178
mean_days_between_releases22.5
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?

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44/60Stars517 stars
12.5/25Forks33 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks33
stars517
watchers5
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads1,974,846 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfast-depends
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads1,974,846
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 84% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth19 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled19
top_contributor_share0.839
How it's scored
32.7/42Issue resolution78% of issues closed
22.9/30PR acceptance187/245 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs187
open_issues10
closed_issues35
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.778
closed_unmerged_prs58
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
18/25Owner reach317 followers of Lancetnik
24.8/25Track record56 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers317
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginLancetnik
public_repos56
account_age_days2,859
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 178 days ago
20/20Version history78 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfast-depends
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish178

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.isort])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://lancetnik.github.io/FastDepends/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsasync, dependency, dependency-injection, fastapi, python, sync, faststream, propan
has_wikino
homepagehttps://lancetnik.github.io/FastDepends/
docs_sitehttps://lancetnik.github.io/FastDepends/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

59Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 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 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
7.5/7.5Maintained16 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages3
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:fast-depends@3.0.8 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 3 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

64Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.pydantic.dev/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history28 of 30 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.pydantic.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.933
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.isort])
11/11Static type checkingfast_depends/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance70 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsfast_depends/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.7
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (fast_depends/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/96 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes19,083
source_files_sampled96
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

517GitHub stars
19contributors
83commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
38releases
1bus factor
10open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-15: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 517 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 515 ★ / 33 ⇿
515Stars
33Forks
38Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-15. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

010020030040050060051533142023-042024-112026-07
Major 2Minor 5Patch 28

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 21:24 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
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
0Code-ReviewFound 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained16 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIanyio>=4.0.0,<5.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-extensions!=4.12.1pyproject.toml
All dependencies 59

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 57 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIanyio4.14.2direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.17.0indirect
PyPIbackrefs5.9indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.8.3indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.3indirect
PyPIclick8.3.0indirect
PyPIcodespell2.4.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.10.7indirect
PyPIcsscompressor0.9.5indirect
PyPIcyclic1.0.0indirect
PyPIdirty-equals0.11indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.0indirect
PyPIfast-depends3.0.8indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIhtmlmin20.1.13indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsmin3.0.1indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown3.9indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdx-include1.4.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.0indirect
PyPImkdocs-markdownextradata-plugin0.2.6indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.7.7indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-minify-plugin0.8.0indirect
PyPImsgspec0.21.1indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.4.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.16.1indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIrcslice1.1.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIruff0.16.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItomli2.2.1indirect
PyPItypes-ujson5.10.0.20250822indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.5.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:fast-depends@3.0.8 pulls in 3 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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.