Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-10 02:28 UTC

TencentCloud / octop-harness

A production-grade agent runtime engineered from the Harness Engineering philosophy.

PythonMIT★ 62 stars⑂ 37 forkssince Sep 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolMCP serverhow this is determined

TencentCloud/octop-harness holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (89/100) and lowest on Security (46/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

75
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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Tencent CloudOrganization · verified domain
1,540 followers209 public repossince Jun 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIoctop-harness1.0.25,42140 days agoagentdeep-agentsharnesslangchainlanggraphllm

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

67Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
13.4/18Commit volume — 30 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_year30
human_commit_share0.784
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 3 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~7.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv1.0.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases7.8

Community & Adoption

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

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29/60Stars — 62 stars
13/25Forks — 37 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks37
stars62
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
49.8/80Monthly downloads — 5,421 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesoctop-harness
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,421
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?

67Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 42% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 8 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.425
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
22.1/30PR acceptance — 25/34 decided PRs merged
8.5/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 15/23 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs25
open_issues6
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d13
prs_decided_7d20
prs_merged_30d15
prs_decided_30d23
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs9
first_time_authors_30d10
first_time_prs_merged_30d15
first_time_prs_decided_30d23
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
22.9/25Owner reach — 1,540 followers of TencentCloud
25/25Track record — 209 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,540
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginTencentCloud
public_repos209
account_age_days3,760
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
12/20Version history — 4 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesoctop-harness
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 10 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://octop.cloud
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent, agent-framework, agents
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://octop.cloud
docs_sitehttps://octop.cloud
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
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
1.5/2.5CI-Tests — 10 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
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
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4/5SAST — SAST tool detected but not 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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 64 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. 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.

89Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, multi_agent_demo/customer-support/AGENTS.md, multi_agent_demo/data-analyst/AGENTS.md, multi_agent_demo/dev-assistant/AGENTS.md, src/octop_harness/builtin/md_files/en/AGENTS.md, src/octop_harness/builtin/md_files/zh/AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 38 of 40 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.95
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, multi_agent_demo/customer-support/AGENTS.md, multi_agent_demo/data-analyst/AGENTS.md, multi_agent_demo/dev-assistant/AGENTS.md, src/octop_harness/builtin/md_files/en/AGENTS.md, src/octop_harness/builtin/md_files/zh/AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes28,733
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — src/octop_harness/cli/py.typed, src/octop_harness/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 19 of the last 51 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 7 of the last 51 commits are automated dependency updates
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_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/octop_harness/cli/py.typed, src/octop_harness/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.373
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.137
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/octop_harness/cli/py.typed, src/octop_harness/py.typed)
54.4/55Manageable file sizes — 4/345 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes83,155
source_files_sampled345
oversized_source_files4
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
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

62GitHub stars
8contributors
30commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
3releases
2bus factor
6open 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:octop-harness@1.0.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 37 ⇿
0Stars
37Forks
2Releases

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.

01325383762026-092026-102026-10
Major 1Minor 0Patch 1
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-10-10 02:28 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal 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
6CI-Tests10 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 4/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
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
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
8SASTSAST tool detected but not 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
0Vulnerabilities64 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIdeepagents>=0.7.16,<0.8pyproject.toml
PyPIlangchain>=1.4.2,<2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlangchain-core>=1.6.3,<2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlangchain-openai>=1.2.2,<2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlangchain-anthropic>=1.7.2,<2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlanggraph>=1.0,<2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlanggraph-checkpoint-sqlite>=2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx>=0.27pyproject.toml
PyPImarkdownify>=0.13pyproject.toml
PyPIoctop-memory>=0.9.9pyproject.toml
PyPIoctop-browser>=0.9.9pyproject.toml
PyPIlangchain-mcp-adapters>=0.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPImcp>=1.27.1,<3pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml>=6.0pyproject.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 statistics — PyPI.