Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-04 15:03 UTC

SamoTech / skills-tree

The universal, platform-agnostic skills and capability registry for AI agents — mapping capabilities, skills, implementations, dependencies, evidence, and platform adapters across agent ecosystems.

PythonMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined

SamoTech/skills-tree holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (49/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Ossama HashimPersonal account
188 followers38 public repossince Aug 2013SamoTech

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
PyPIskills-tree1.73.14,2801100 days agoaiagentsskillscapabilitiesregistryrecommendationllmtaxonomymcp

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
15.9/36Commit cadence — 23/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 2,573 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 11 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year2,573
human_commit_share0.93
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year23
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv1.73.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0

Community & Adoption

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

49Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars3
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges18
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
48.4/80Monthly downloads — 4,280 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesskills-tree
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads4,280
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?

56Moderate · 23% of overall
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
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
41.4/42Issue resolution — 98% of issues closed
26.9/30PR acceptance — 228/254 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs228
open_issues1
closed_issues66
prs_merged_7d54
prs_decided_7d60
prs_merged_30d54
prs_decided_30d60
issue_closed_ratio0.985
closed_unmerged_prs26
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.4/25Owner reach — 188 followers of SamoTech
23.6/25Track record — 38 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers188
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginSamoTech
public_repos38
account_age_days4,791
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 110 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesskills-tree
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 42 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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 site — https://samotech.github.io/skills-tree/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent, ai, ai-agents, markdown, md, memory-management, skills
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://samotech.github.io/skills-tree/
docs_sitehttps://samotech.github.io/skills-tree/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 16% of overall
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 8 out of 8 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 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 11 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.7

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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present
40/40Legible commit history — 93 of 93 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,578
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer
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
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/132 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes40,804
source_files_sampled132
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

3GitHub stars
1contributors
2,573commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:skills-tree@1.73.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-10-04 15:02 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests8 out of 8 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 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 11 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIfastapi>=0.111.0pyproject.toml
PyPIuvicorn>=0.29.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>=2.7.0pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx>=0.27.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyper>=0.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.7.0pyproject.toml
PyPInetworkx>=3.0pyproject.toml
PyPImarkdown>=3.5pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.31pyproject.toml
PyPIjsonschema>=4.23pyproject.toml
All dependencies 15

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 6 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIfastapi—direct
PyPIhttpx—direct
PyPImarkdown—direct
PyPInetworkx—direct
PyPIpydantic—direct
PyPIrequests—direct
PyPIrich—direct
PyPItyper—direct
PyPIuvicorn—direct
PyPIopenai—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpython-semantic-release—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIskills-tree—indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statistics — PyPI.