Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-22 02:47 UTC

Sahil170595 / Chimeraforge

PyPI capacity-planning CLI for LLM deployment. pip install chimeraforge.

PythonMIT★ 2 stars⑂ 1 forksince Nov 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

Sahil170595/Chimeraforge holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (88/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (44/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

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

Ownership

Sahil KadadekarPersonal account
17 followers37 public repossince Oct 2023

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
PyPIchimeraforge0.27.02,506350 days agollminferencebenchmarkdeploymentgpuoptimizationvramgpu-sizingquantizationollamavllmllama-cppggufcapacity-planningmcp

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence15/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume197 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year197
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year15

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases34 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tagv0.27.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.4

Community & Adoption

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

44Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars2 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars2
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
45.3/80Monthly downloads2,506 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageschimeraforge
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads2,506
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.995
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
28.6/30PR acceptance41/43 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs41
open_issues0
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d18
prs_decided_7d18
prs_merged_30d35
prs_decided_30d36
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
9/25Owner reach17 followers of Sahil170595
17.2/25Track record37 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers17
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginSahil170595
public_repos37
account_age_days1,041
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 0 days ago
20/20Version history35 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageschimeraforge
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://github.com/Sahil170595/Chimeraforge#readme
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics14 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagents, benchmarking, llm, ollama, performance, rust, capacity-planning, gpu, llm-inference, mcp, python, quantization, vllm, vram
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://github.com/Sahil170595/Chimeraforge#readme
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
30/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles
manifestspyproject.toml, requirements-observability.txt, requirements.txt
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyyes
has_dependabot_configyes

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.

77Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history94 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.969
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes40,805
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapexperiments/research/tr109/rust_agent/Cargo.toml, experiments/research/tr110/rust_multiagent/Cargo.toml, src/rust/demo_agent/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance3 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsexperiments/research/tr109/rust_agent/Cargo.toml, experiments/research/tr110/rust_multiagent/Cargo.toml, src/rust/demo_agent/Cargo.toml, src/rust/demo_multiagent/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.03
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
54.2/55Manageable file sizes7/473 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes94,056
source_files_sampled473
oversized_source_files7
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

2GitHub stars
2contributors
197commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:chimeraforge@0.27.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItyper>=0.9,<1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.0,<16.0pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx>=0.25pyproject.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.