Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 07:17 UTC

OpShin / uplc

Python implementation of Untyped Plutus Language Core

Python · Untyped Plutus CoreMIT★ 9 stars⑂ 5 forkssince Jan 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

OpShin/uplc holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (76/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (41/100). It was last updated 50 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

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

Ownership

OpShin ToolchainOrganization
72 followers37 public repossince Mar 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIuplc1.3.35,6496350 days agocardanocompilerlanguageprogramming-languagepythonsmart-contractsvalidator

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

59Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

31At Risk
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 50 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
10.8/18Commit volume — 15 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year15
human_commit_share0.93
days_since_last_push50
active_weeks_last_year3

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 19 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 50 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~40.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count19
latest_release_tag1.3.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release50
mean_days_between_releases40.8
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?

41Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

20At Risk
How it's scored
14.6/60Stars — 9 stars
5/25Forks — 5 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks5
stars9
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, coveralls.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

62Moderate
How it's scored
50/80Monthly downloads — 5,649 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesuplc
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,649
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

23At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.987

Issue & PR responsiveness

73Good
How it's scored
40.2/42Issue resolution — 96% of issues closed
23.6/30PR acceptance — 22/28 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs22
open_issues1
closed_issues22
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.957
closed_unmerged_prs6
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

64Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
13.4/25Owner reach — 72 followers of OpShin
20.6/25Track record — 37 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers72
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginOpShin
public_repos37
account_age_days1,664

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 50 days ago
20/20Version history — 63 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesuplc
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish50

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

38Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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 — 51 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

77Good
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
8.6/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: certifi 2026.10.18 (high 7.4), ecdsa 0.19.2 (high 7.4)
33.8/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,002 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages2
assessed_packages54
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2
direct_affected_packages0
Matched the pypi:uplc@1.3.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 54 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.

43Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

4Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
4/40Legible commit history — 7 of 93 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.075
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

48Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
53.1/55Manageable file sizes — 1/29 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes228,137
source_files_sampled29
oversized_source_files1

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 — example, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
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

9GitHub stars
3contributors
15commits, last 12 months
50days since last push
19releases
1bus factor
1open 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 ★ / 5 ⇿
0Stars
5Forks
18Releases

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.

12345512023-042024-102026-03
Major 1Minor 3Patch 14

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 07:17 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests3 out of 3 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 0/13 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
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
0Vulnerabilities51 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIfrozendict>=2.3.8pyproject.toml
PyPIcbor2>=5.4.6pyproject.toml
PyPIfrozenlist2>=1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrply>=0.7.8pyproject.toml
PyPIpycardano>=0.9.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-secp256k1-cardano>=0.2.4pyproject.toml
PyPIbitstring>=4.2.3pyproject.toml
PyPIpycryptodome>=3.21.0pyproject.toml
PyPIregex>=2025.9.18pyproject.toml
PyPIpynacl>=1.6.0pyproject.toml
PyPIbitarray>=3.7.2pyproject.toml
PyPIpyblst>=0.3.14pyproject.toml
All dependencies 127

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 114 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbitarray3.7.2direct
PyPIbitstring4.3.1direct
PyPIcbor25.7.0direct
PyPIfrozendict2.4.6direct
PyPIfrozenlist21.0.0direct
PyPIpyblst0.3.14direct
PyPIpycardano0.13.2direct
PyPIpycardano0.16.0direct
PyPIpycryptodome3.23.0direct
PyPIpynacl1.6.0direct
PyPIpython-secp256k1-cardano0.2.4direct
PyPIregex2025.9.18direct
PyPIrply0.7.8direct
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.11.0indirect
PyPIappdirs1.4.4indirect
PyPIasn1crypto1.5.1indirect
PyPIattrs25.4.0indirect
PyPIbackports-tarfile1.2.0indirect
PyPIblack25.9.0indirect
PyPIblockfrost-python0.6.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.3.0indirect
PyPIcachecontrol0.14.3indirect
PyPIcachetools5.5.2indirect
PyPIcachetools6.2.1indirect
PyPIcardano-tools2.1.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.10.5indirect
PyPIcertvalidator0.11.1indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.3indirect
PyPIcleo2.1.0indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIclick8.3.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoloredlogs15.0.1indirect
PyPIcose0.9.dev8indirect
PyPIcoverage7.10.7indirect
PyPIcrashtest0.4.1indirect
PyPIcryptography46.0.2indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIdocker7.1.0indirect
PyPIdulwich0.24.2indirect
PyPIecdsa0.19.1indirect
PyPIecpy1.2.5indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.0indirect
PyPIfastjsonschema2.21.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.19.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.20.0indirect
PyPIfindpython0.7.0indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIhumanfriendly10.0indirect
PyPIhypothesis6.140.3indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.15indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIinstaller0.7.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.0.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.3.0indirect
PyPIjeepney0.9.0indirect
PyPIkeyring25.6.0indirect
PyPImnemonic0.21indirect
PyPImore-itertools10.8.0indirect
PyPImsgpack1.1.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPIogmios1.3.0indirect
PyPIogmios1.4.2indirect
PyPIorjson3.11.3indirect
PyPIoscrypto1.3.0indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIparameterized0.9.0indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIpbs-installer2025.10.10indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpkginfo1.12.1.2indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.4.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.5.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpoetry2.2.1indirect
PyPIpoetry-bumpversion0.3.3indirect
PyPIpoetry-core2.2.1indirect
PyPIpprintpp0.4.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.3.0indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpycparser2.23indirect
PyPIpydantic2.12.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.41.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpyreadline33.5.4indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytokens0.1.10indirect
PyPIpywin32311indirect
PyPIpywin32-ctypes0.2.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrapidfuzz3.13.0indirect
PyPIrapidfuzz3.14.1indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.3.3indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.4.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools80.9.0indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPItomli2.3.0indirect
PyPItomlkit0.13.3indirect
PyPItrove-classifiers2025.9.11.17indirect
PyPItypeguard4.4.4indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIuplc1.3.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.5.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.35.3indirect
PyPIwebsocket-client1.9.0indirect
PyPIwebsockets13.1indirect
PyPIwebsockets15.0.1indirect
PyPIxattr1.2.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
PyPIzstandard0.25.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

Installing pypi:uplc@1.3.3 pulls in 54 packages, direct and transitive: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
certifi2026.10.18indirecthigh22026.10.19
ecdsa0.19.2indirecthigh2—

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 OpShin/uplc. Read them side by side →

98ballerina-platform/ballerina-langThe Ballerina Programming LanguageExceptional98apache/foryA blazingly fast multi-language serialization framework for idiomatic domain objects, schema IDL, and cross-language data exchange.Exceptional98vyperlang/vyperPythonic Smart Contract Language for the EVMExceptional97Xilinx/mlir-aieA close-to-metal Python API for programming AMD Ryzen™ AI NPUs (AI Engines), built on an open-source MLIR-based compiler toolchain.Exceptional99rust-lang/rustEmpowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.Exceptional98ruby/rubyThe Ruby Programming LanguageExceptional

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.