Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-17 19:55 UTC

PolicyEngine / policyengine-uk

An open-source static tax-benefit microsimulation model for the UK.

PythonAGPL-3.0★ 48 stars⑂ 33 forkssince Aug 2020View on GitHub ↗

#psl-cataloged #economic-policy #economics #inequality #policy #poverty #public-policy #python #tax #united-kingdom

PolicyEngine/policyengine-uk holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (78/100) and lowest on Security (56/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PolicyEngineOrganization

185 followers328 public repossince Aug 2021

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	policyengine-uk	2.91.0	44,186	416	0 days ago	benefit microsimulation social tax

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

89Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
24.9/36	Commit cadence — 36/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 651 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 24 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	651
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	36

Release discipline

40Weak

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 4 releases published
0/36	Release recency — latest release 1,587 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~173.3 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	4
latest_release_tag	synth-frs-v1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	1,587
mean_days_between_releases	173.3

Community & Adoption

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

61Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

42Weak

How it's scored

27.1/60	Stars — 48 stars
12.5/25	Forks — 33 forks
2.7/15	Watchers — 4 watchers

Inputs used

forks	33
stars	48
watchers	4
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

70Good

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	2
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	badge.fury.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

77Good

How it's scored

61.9/80	Monthly downloads — 44,186 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	policyengine-uk
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	44,186
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?

70Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

37Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.3/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 63% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 21 contributors
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	21
top_contributor_share	0.63

Issue & PR responsiveness

70Good

How it's scored

34.6/42	Issue resolution — 82% of issues closed
26.2/30	PR acceptance — 776/889 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	776
open_issues	153
closed_issues	710
prs_merged_7d	6
prs_decided_7d	7
prs_merged_30d	9
prs_decided_30d	11
issue_closed_ratio	0.823
closed_unmerged_prs	113
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

87Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
16.3/25	Owner reach — 185 followers of PolicyEngine
23.1/25	Track record — 328 public repos, account ~5 yr old

Inputs used

followers	185
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	PolicyEngine
public_repos	328
account_age_days	1,836

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 — 416 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	policyengine-uk
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

64Moderate

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
16/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 13 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://policyengine.github.io/policyengine-uk/
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 10 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	psl-cataloged, economic-policy, economics, inequality, policy, poverty, public-policy, python, tax, united-kingdom
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://policyengine.github.io/policyengine-uk/
docs_site	https://policyengine.github.io/policyengine-uk/
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?

56Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

45Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2/2.5	CI-Tests — 13 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 2/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 24 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
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
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not 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 — 25 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	4.5

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

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	45
affected_packages	10
assessed_packages	147
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 6, moderate 4
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 147 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.

68Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

70Good

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
25.1/40	Legible commit history — 47 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.47
agent_instruction_files	CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	5,113

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

60Moderate

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 14 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
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	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.14
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/973 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	27,712
source_files_sampled	973
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

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

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples, notebooks
has_mcp_signal	no
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

48GitHub stars

21contributors

651commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

4releases

1bus factor

153open 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:policyengine-uk@2.91.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 33 ⇿

0Stars

33Forks

3Releases

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 1Patch 1

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10

4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-17 19:55 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
8	CI-Tests	13 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 2/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6	Contributors	project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 24 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow 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
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not 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	25 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 6

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	policyengine-core	`>=3.30.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	microdf-python	`>=1.2.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pydantic	`>=2.11.7`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tables	`>=3.9.2,<3.10.2`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tables	`>=3.10.0,<3.10.2`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tables	`>=3.10.2`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 147

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 143 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	microdf-python	`1.2.1`	direct
PyPI	policyengine-core	`3.30.4`	direct
PyPI	pydantic	`2.11.7`	direct
PyPI	tables	`3.10.2`	direct
PyPI	alabaster	`0.7.16`	indirect
PyPI	annotated-types	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	anyio	`4.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	appnope	`0.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	argon2-cffi	`25.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	argon2-cffi-bindings	`21.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	argon2-cffi-bindings	`25.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	arrow	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	asttokens	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	attrs	`25.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	babel	`2.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	beautifulsoup4	`4.13.4`	indirect
PyPI	bleach	`6.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	blosc2	`3.7.2`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2025.7.9`	indirect
PyPI	cffi	`1.17.1`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	comm	`0.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.9.2`	indirect
PyPI	debugpy	`1.8.14`	indirect
PyPI	decorator	`5.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	defusedxml	`0.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	docutils	`0.19`	indirect
PyPI	dpath	`2.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	executing	`2.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	fastjsonschema	`2.21.1`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.20.3`	indirect
PyPI	fqdn	`1.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	fsspec	`2025.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	furo	`2022.12.7`	indirect
PyPI	h5py	`3.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	hf-xet	`1.1.5`	indirect
PyPI	huggingface-hub	`0.33.4`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.15`	indirect
PyPI	imagesize	`1.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	ipykernel	`6.29.5`	indirect
PyPI	ipython	`8.37.0`	indirect
PyPI	isoduration	`20.11.0`	indirect
PyPI	jedi	`0.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	jsonpickle	`4.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	jsonpointer	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema	`4.24.0`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema-specifications	`2025.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	jupyter-book	`2.0.0b2`	indirect
PyPI	jupyter-client	`8.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	jupyter-core	`5.8.1`	indirect
PyPI	jupyter-events	`0.12.0`	indirect
PyPI	jupyter-server	`2.18.0`	indirect
PyPI	jupyter-server-terminals	`0.5.3`	indirect
PyPI	jupyterlab-pygments	`0.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`3.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	matplotlib-inline	`0.1.7`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mistune	`3.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	msgpack	`1.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	nbclient	`0.10.2`	indirect
PyPI	nbconvert	`7.17.1`	indirect
PyPI	nbformat	`5.10.4`	indirect
PyPI	ndindex	`1.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	nest-asyncio	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	networkx	`3.5`	indirect
PyPI	nodeenv	`1.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	numexpr	`2.11.0`	indirect
PyPI	numpy	`2.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	overrides	`7.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`25.0`	indirect
PyPI	pandas	`2.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	pandocfilters	`1.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	parso	`0.8.4`	indirect
PyPI	pexpect	`4.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.3.8`	indirect
PyPI	plotly	`5.24.1`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	policyengine-uk	`2.90.1`	indirect
PyPI	prometheus-client	`0.22.1`	indirect
PyPI	prompt-toolkit	`3.0.51`	indirect
PyPI	psutil	`6.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	ptyprocess	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	pure-eval	`0.2.3`	indirect
PyPI	py-cpuinfo	`9.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	pycparser	`2.22`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-core	`2.33.2`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.20.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`8.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`6.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	indirect
PyPI	python-json-logger	`3.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytz	`2025.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyvis	`0.3.2`	indirect
PyPI	pywin32	`310`	indirect
PyPI	pywinpty	`2.0.15`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyzmq	`27.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	referencing	`0.36.2`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.33.0`	indirect
PyPI	rfc3339-validator	`0.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	rfc3986-validator	`0.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`14.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	rpds-py	`0.26.0`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.15.7`	indirect
PyPI	send2trash	`1.8.3`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`80.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	sniffio	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	snowballstemmer	`2.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	sortedcontainers	`2.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	soupsieve	`2.7`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`6.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-argparse	`0.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-basic-ng	`1.0.0b2`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-math-dollar	`1.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-applehelp	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-devhelp	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-htmlhelp	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-jsmath	`1.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-qthelp	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-serializinghtml	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	stack-data	`0.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	standard-imghdr	`3.13.0`	indirect
PyPI	tenacity	`9.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	terminado	`0.18.1`	indirect
PyPI	tinycss2	`1.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	tornado	`6.5.5`	indirect
PyPI	towncrier	`25.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	tqdm	`4.67.1`	indirect
PyPI	traitlets	`5.14.3`	indirect
PyPI	types-python-dateutil	`2.9.0.20250708`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.14.1`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspection	`0.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	tzdata	`2025.2`	indirect
PyPI	uri-template	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	wcwidth	`0.2.13`	indirect
PyPI	webcolors	`24.11.1`	indirect
PyPI	webencodings	`0.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	websocket-client	`1.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	wheel	`0.45.1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 10

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 147 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 10 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
click	`8.2.1`	indirect	high	1	`8.3.3`
mistune	`3.2.1`	indirect	high	20	`3.3.0`
msgpack	`1.1.1`	indirect	high	2	`1.2.1`
soupsieve	`2.7`	indirect	high	4	`2.8.4`
tornado	`6.5.5`	indirect	high	7	`6.5.7`
wheel	`0.45.1`	indirect	high	2	`0.46.2`
bleach	`6.2.0`	indirect	moderate	2	`6.4.0`
jupyter-server	`2.18.0`	indirect	moderate	3	`2.20.0`
pytest	`8.4.1`	indirect	moderate	2	`9.0.3`
setuptools	`80.9.0`	indirect	moderate	2	`83.0.0`

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 v0.31.0 — 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