Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-24 10:44 UTC

MaximeRivest / attachments

Easiest way to give context to LLMs; Attachments has the ambition to be the general funnel for any files to be transformed into images+text for large language models context by only adding 2 lines to your python code.

PythonMIT★ 368 stars⑂ 29 forkssince May 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

MaximeRivest/attachments holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (91/100) and lowest on Security (45/100). It was last updated 74 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

65
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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Maxime RivestPersonal account
376 followers123 public repossince Feb 2015

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
PyPIattachments0.25.17,30734346 days agollmaipdfdocumentmultimodalopenaiclaudecontextattachments

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

51Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

44Weak
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 74 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
12.9/18Commit volume — 26 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 19 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year26
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push74
active_weeks_last_year5

Release discipline

62Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 1 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 348 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv0.24.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release348
mean_days_between_releases—
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

54Moderate
How it's scored
41.6/60Stars — 368 stars
12.1/25Forks — 29 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks29
stars368
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

64Moderate
How it's scored
51.5/80Monthly downloads — 7,307 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesattachments
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads7,307
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?

50Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

47Weak
How it's scored
15/42Issue resolution — 36% of issues closed
25.7/30PR acceptance — 12/14 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs12
open_issues9
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.357
closed_unmerged_prs2
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.

Ownership & stewardship

67Good
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.5/25Owner reach — 376 followers of MaximeRivest
25/25Track record — 123 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers376
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginMaximeRivest
public_repos123
account_age_days4,211
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

91Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 346 days ago
20/20Version history — 34 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesattachments
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish346

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

91Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

92Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://maximerivest.github.io/attachments/
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://maximerivest.github.io/attachments/
docs_sitehttps://maximerivest.github.io/attachments/
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

31At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
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 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
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 — 19 commit(s) and 0 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
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 77 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate3.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages41
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:attachments@0.25.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 41 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 21 of 26 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.808
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

54Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — src/attachments/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 26
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/attachments/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/attachments/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/76 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes27,927
source_files_sampled76
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

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

Key facts

368GitHub stars
1contributors
26commits, last 12 months
74days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
9open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 29 ⇿
0Stars
29Forks
1Releases

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.

0510152025302832025-052025-112026-06
Major 0Minor 1Patch 0
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-24 10:44 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained19 commit(s) and 0 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
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities77 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 128

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 128 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.10.0indirect
PyPIappnope0.1.4indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.0indirect
PyPIattachments—indirect
PyPIattachments1.0.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIav17.1.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.13.5indirect
PyPIcairocffi1.7.1indirect
PyPIcairosvg2.9.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.8.3indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.3indirect
PyPIclick8.4.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIcoverage7.10.6indirect
PyPIcryptography46.0.3indirect
PyPIcssselect20.9.0indirect
PyPIctranslate24.8.0indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.16indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIet-xmlfile2.0.0indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfaster-whisper1.2.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.19.1indirect
PyPIflatbuffers25.12.19indirect
PyPIfsspec2026.4.0indirect
PyPIgunicorn25.1.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhf-xet1.5.1indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIhttpx-sse0.4.3indirect
PyPIhuggingface-hub1.18.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.14indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIipykernel6.30.1indirect
PyPIipython9.5.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.6.3indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.8.1indirect
PyPIlxml6.0.1indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.1.7indirect
PyPImcp1.27.2indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPInest-asyncio1.6.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPInumpy2.3.2indirect
PyPIonnxruntime1.26.0indirect
PyPIopencv-python4.13.0.92indirect
PyPIopenpyxl3.1.5indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIpandas2.3.2indirect
PyPIparso0.8.5indirect
PyPIpdfminer-six20251107indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow12.2.0indirect
PyPIpillow-heif1.3.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.4.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.3.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIprotobuf7.35.0indirect
PyPIpsutil7.0.0indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpyclipper1.4.0indirect
PyPIpycparser2.22indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-settings2.14.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.13.0indirect
PyPIpymupdf1.26.4indirect
PyPIpypdf6.5.0indirect
PyPIpyperclip1.11.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest-cov6.3.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-docx1.2.0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.32indirect
PyPIpython-pptx1.0.2indirect
PyPIpytz2025.2indirect
PyPIpywin32311indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.0.2indirect
PyPIrapidocr-onnxruntime1.4.4indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.5.1indirect
PyPIruff0.12.12indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPIshapely2.1.2indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8indirect
PyPIsse-starlette3.4.4indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIstarlette1.2.1indirect
PyPItinycss21.5.1indirect
PyPItokenizers0.23.1indirect
PyPItornado6.5.2indirect
PyPItqdm4.68.2indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItyper0.25.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPItzdata2025.2indirect
PyPIuv-build—indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.49.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.34.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.2.13indirect
PyPIwebencodings0.5.1indirect
PyPIxlrd2.0.2indirect
PyPIxlsxwriter3.2.9indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:attachments@0.25.1 pulls in 41 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with MaximeRivest/attachments. Read them side by side →

98Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPTAutoGPT is the vision of accessible AI for everyone, to use and to build on. Our mission is to provide the tools, so that you can focus on what matters.Exceptional97langgenius/difyBuild Agentic workflows, RAG pipelines, with rich AI model and tool support on one collaborative workspace. Deploy on cloud, VPC, or self-hosted, so teams move from prototype to production without rebuilding the stack.Exceptional95NousResearch/hermes-agentThe agent that grows with youExceptional96yamadashy/repomix📦 Repomix is a powerful tool that packs your entire repository into a single, AI-friendly file. Perfect for when you need to feed your codebase to Large Language Models (LLMs) or other AI tools like Claude, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Perplexity, Gemini, Gemma, Llama, Grok, and more.Exceptional96vercel/aiThe AI Toolkit for TypeScript. From the creators of Next.js, the AI SDK is a free open-source library for building AI-powered applications and agents Exceptional95TanStack/ai🤖 Type-safe, provider-agnostic TypeScript AI SDK for streaming chat, tool calling, agents, and multimodal apps across OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, React, Vue, Svelte, and Solid.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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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