Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-21 19:54 UTC

OmniNode-ai / omnibase_core

ONEX Core Framework - Base classes and essential implementations for the ONEX ecosystem

PythonMIT★ 7 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Aug 2025View on GitHub ↗

KindPluginLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

OmniNode-ai/omnibase_core holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Security (46/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OmniNode.aiOrganization

8 followers15 public repossince Apr 2025

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	omnibase_core	0.46.11	175,160	95	0 days ago	architecture base-classes dependency-injection error-handling event-driven framework infrastructure node-architecture onex

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

94Exceptional

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
30.5/36	Commit cadence — 44/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 1,487 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	1,487
human_commit_share	0.97
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	44

Release discipline

90Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 55 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~5.8 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	55
latest_release_tag	v0.46.11
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	0
mean_days_between_releases	5.8

Community & Adoption

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

60Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

15Critical

How it's scored

12.6/60	Stars — 7 stars
2.5/25	Forks — 3 forks
0/15	Watchers — 0 watchers

Inputs used

forks	3
stars	7
watchers	0
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

92Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	3
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	yes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

87Excellent

How it's scored

69.9/80	Monthly downloads — 175,160 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	omnibase_core
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	175,160
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

16Critical

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
4.1/13.5	Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
3/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	3
top_contributor_share	0.999

Issue & PR responsiveness

70Good

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — no issues or no data
27.8/30	PR acceptance — 1,444/1,561 decided PRs merged
13/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	1,444
open_issues	0
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	17
prs_decided_7d	17
prs_merged_30d	51
prs_decided_30d	56
issue_closed_ratio	—
closed_unmerged_prs	117
first_time_authors_30d	1
first_time_prs_merged_30d	1
first_time_prs_decided_30d	1

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

60Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
6.9/25	Owner reach — 8 followers of OmniNode-ai
11.4/25	Track record — 15 public repos, account ~1 yr old

Inputs used

followers	8
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	OmniNode-ai
public_repos	15
account_age_days	483

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20	Version history — 95 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	omnibase_core
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 67 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

90Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/OmniNode-ai/omnibase_core/tree/main/docs
10/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	https://github.com/OmniNode-ai/omnibase_core/tree/main/docs
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

44Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 1/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5	Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
2/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 14 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	4.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

55Moderate

How it's scored

11.9/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: click 8.3.1 (high 7.2), deepdiff 8.6.1 (high 7.5)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
29.3/40	No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 155 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	26
affected_packages	7
assessed_packages	83
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 4, moderate 2, low 1
direct_affected_packages	2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 83 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

85Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — AGENT.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 97 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	AGENT.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	14,178

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

80Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11	Static type checking — mypy.ini, pyrightconfig.json, src/omnibase_core/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 3 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	mypy.ini, pyrightconfig.json, src/omnibase_core/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.03

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (mypy.ini, pyrightconfig.json, src/omnibase_core/py.typed)
54.7/55	Manageable file sizes — 32/6,269 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	175,892
source_files_sampled	6,269
oversized_source_files	32

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20	MCP server
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	yes
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

7GitHub stars

3contributors

1,487commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

55releases

1bus factor

0open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
deps.dev does not index pypi:omnibase_core@0.46.11; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿

0Stars

3Forks

32Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 22Patch 10

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10

4.4aggregate

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 19:53 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 1/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3	Contributors	project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	14 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 13

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	pydantic	`>=2.12.5,<3.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pyyaml	`>=6.0.2,<7.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	dependency-injector	`>=4.48.3,<5.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	deepdiff	`>=8.0.0,<10.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	click	`>=8.3.1,<9.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	cryptography	`>=50.0.0,<51.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	jsonschema	`>=4.25.1,<5.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	httpx	`>=0.27.0,<1.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	blake3	`>=1.0.8,<2.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	ruamel-yaml	`>=0.18.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tree-sitter	`>=0.25.2,<0.27`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tree-sitter-python	`>=0.25.0,<0.26`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pathspec	`>=0.12.1`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 83

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 70 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	blake3	`1.0.8`	direct
PyPI	click	`8.3.1`	direct
PyPI	cryptography	`50.0.0`	direct
PyPI	deepdiff	`8.6.1`	direct
PyPI	dependency-injector	`4.48.3`	direct
PyPI	httpx	`0.28.1`	direct
PyPI	jsonschema	`4.26.0`	direct
PyPI	pathspec	`1.0.4`	direct
PyPI	pydantic	`2.12.5`	direct
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.3`	direct
PyPI	ruamel-yaml	`0.19.1`	direct
PyPI	tree-sitter	`0.25.2`	direct
PyPI	tree-sitter-python	`0.25.0`	direct
PyPI	aiokafka	`0.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	annotated-types	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	anyio	`4.12.0`	indirect
PyPI	async-timeout	`5.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	attrs	`25.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2025.11.12`	indirect
PyPI	cffi	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	cfgv	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	confluent-kafka	`2.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.13.4`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	execnet	`2.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.24.0`	indirect
PyPI	grimp	`3.15`	indirect
PyPI	h11	`0.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	httpcore	`1.0.9`	indirect
PyPI	hypothesis	`6.151.6`	indirect
PyPI	identify	`2.6.16`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.11`	indirect
PyPI	import-linter	`2.13`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	interrogate	`1.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema-specifications	`2025.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	librt	`0.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`1.19.1`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	nodeenv	`1.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	omnibase-core	`0.46.11`	indirect
PyPI	omnibase-spi	`0.20.2`	indirect
PyPI	onex-change-control	`0.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	orderly-set	`5.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`26.0`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`4.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	prometheus-client	`0.24.1`	indirect
PyPI	psutil	`7.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	py	`1.11.0`	indirect
PyPI	pycparser	`3.0`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-core	`2.41.5`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyjwt	`2.10.1`	indirect
PyPI	pyright	`1.1.408`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-asyncio	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`7.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-rerunfailures	`16.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-split	`0.11.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-testmon	`2.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-timeout	`2.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-xdist	`3.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	redis	`5.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	referencing	`0.37.0`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`15.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	rpds-py	`0.30.0`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.14.14`	indirect
PyPI	sortedcontainers	`2.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	sqlglot	`26.33.0`	indirect
PyPI	tabulate	`0.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	tomli-w	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	types-psutil	`7.2.2.20260130`	indirect
PyPI	types-pyyaml	`6.0.12.20250915`	indirect
PyPI	types-requests	`2.32.4.20260107`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspection	`0.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	virtualenv	`20.36.1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 7

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 83 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 7 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
click	`8.3.1`	direct	high	1	`8.3.3`
deepdiff	`8.6.1`	direct	high	2	`8.6.2`
pyjwt	`2.10.1`	indirect	high	13	`2.13.0`
urllib3	`2.6.3`	indirect	high	4	`2.7.0`
idna	`3.11`	indirect	moderate	2	`3.15`
pytest	`9.0.2`	indirect	moderate	2	`9.0.3`
pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect	low	2	`2.20.0`

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.

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.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records