Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 15:43 UTC

Solganis / assertpy2

Fluent, fully-typed assertion library for Python: type-narrowing assertions, contract testing, composable matchers, and structural matching.

PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 4 stars⑂ 1 forksince May 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#assertions#pytest#python#soft-assertions#testing#fluent-assertions#async-testing#matchers#type-safety#structural-matching#allure#behave#numpy#pandas#polars#assertpy#pydantic#assertj#contract-testing#attrs

Solganis/assertpy2 holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (75/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (43/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SolganisPersonal account
2 followers6 public repossince Oct 2018

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
PyPIassertpy22.17.06,017340 days agoassertassert-thatassertionassertpyassertthatfluentmatcherspytesttesttestingtype-safeunittest

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

75Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

60Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 341 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year341
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 34 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.7 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 7 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tagv2.17.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases2.7

Community & Adoption

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

43Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

8Critical
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars — 4 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars4
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

63Moderate
How it's scored
50.4/80Monthly downloads — 6,017 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesassertpy2
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads6,017
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

34At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 50% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 18 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.501

Issue & PR responsiveness

56Moderate
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
25.4/30PR acceptance — 11/13 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs11
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

40Weak
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
3.4/25Owner reach — 2 followers of Solganis
18.2/25Track record — 6 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginSolganis
public_repos6
account_age_days2,819
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 — 34 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesassertpy2
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

72Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

60Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://solganis.github.io/assertpy2/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsassertions, pytest, python, soft-assertions, testing, fluent-assertions, async-testing, matchers, type-safety, structural-matching, allure, behave, numpy, pandas, polars, assertpy, pydantic, assertj, contract-testing, attrs
has_wikino
homepagehttps://solganis.github.io/assertpy2/
docs_sitehttps://solganis.github.io/assertpy2/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

71Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

71Good
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
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
1.8/2.5CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: Silver
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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 — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool detected: CodeQL
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 7 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

45Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

64Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — assertpy2/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsassertpy2/py.typed
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (assertpy2/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/108 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes58,815
source_files_sampled108
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

4GitHub stars
18contributors
341commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 15:43 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
7CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Silver
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool detected: CodeQL
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 7 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItyping_extensions>=4.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 112

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 111 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.14.1indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIallure-pytest2.16.0indirect
PyPIallure-python-commons2.16.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanybadge1.16.0indirect
PyPIassertpy22.17.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.2indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbackrefs7.0indirect
PyPIbehave1.3.3indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcosmic-ray8.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.2indirect
PyPIcucumber-expressions20.0.0indirect
PyPIcucumber-tag-expressions10.0.0indirect
PyPIdecorator5.3.1indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIexit-codes1.3.0indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgitdb4.0.12indirect
PyPIgitpython3.1.52indirect
PyPIgreenlet3.5.3indirect
PyPIgriffelib2.1.0indirect
PyPIhypothesis6.156.6indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonpath-ng1.8.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.2indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.4indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.2indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.7.7indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-redirects1.2.3indirect
PyPImkdocstrings1.0.6indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python2.0.5indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPInumpy2.2.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.5.1indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpandas2.3.3indirect
PyPIpandas3.0.3indirect
PyPIparse1.22.1indirect
PyPIparse-type0.6.6indirect
PyPIparso0.8.7indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.10.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpolars1.42.1indirect
PyPIpolars-runtime-321.42.1indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2indirect
PyPIproperdocs1.6.7indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions11.0.1indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.411indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-codspeed5.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-examples0.0.18indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpytz2026.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruff0.15.22indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsmmap5.0.3indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy2.0.51indirect
PyPIstevedore5.8.0indirect
PyPIstevedore5.9.0indirect
PyPItoml0.10.2indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPIty0.0.61indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIyarl1.24.2indirect
PyPIyattag1.16.1indirect
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 Solganis/assertpy2. Read them side by side →

98pytest-dev/pytestThe pytest framework makes it easy to write small tests, yet scales to support complex functional testingExceptional99pydata/xarrayN-D labeled arrays and datasets in PythonExceptional98dask/daskParallel computing with task schedulingExceptional97microsoft/testfxThis repository holds the source code of Microsoft.Testing.Platform (MTP), a lightweight alternative to VSTest, as well as MSTest adapter and framework.Exceptional100numpy/numpyThe fundamental package for scientific computing with Python.Exceptional99litestar-org/litestarLight, flexible and extensible ASGI framework | Built to scaleExceptional

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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.