Public recordExceptional
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-15 23:39 UTC
XRPLF / xrpl-py
A Python library to interact with the XRP Ledger (XRPL) blockchain
XRPLF/xrpl-py holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on Security (70/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.
94
overall / 100Software 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.
94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
XRP Ledger Foundation (Official)Organization
1,100 followers53 public repossince Jul 2020
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 | xrpl-py | 5.2.0 | 90,034 | 57 | 29 days ago | xrpxrplcryptocurrency |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
86
Development activity
78Good
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 0 days ago |
| 17.3/36 | Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits |
| 14.8/18 | Commit volume — 43 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 12 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 43 |
| human_commit_share | 0.79 |
| days_since_last_push | 0 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 25 |
Release discipline
98Exceptional
How it's scored
| 27/27 | Ships releases — 53 releases published |
| 36/36 | Release recency — latest release 0 days ago |
| 27/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~37.4 days |
| 8/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts. |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 53 |
| latest_release_tag | v5.3.0b0 |
| releases_from_tags | no |
| days_since_latest_release | 0 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 37.4 |
Community & Adoption
Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?
74
Popularity & adoption
65Good
How it's scored
| 38.8/60 | Stars — 247 stars |
| 17.8/25 | Forks — 137 forks |
| 8.2/15 | Watchers — 31 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 137 |
| stars | 247 |
| watchers | 31 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
77Good
How it's scored
| 22.5/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (ISC) |
| 18/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 0/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 6.3/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | yes |
| has_license | yes |
| readme_badges | 3 |
| has_contributing | yes |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | readthedocs.org, shields.io |
| has_pull_request_template | yes |
Ecosystem adoption (downloads)
83Excellent
How it's scored
| 66.1/80 | Monthly downloads — 90,034 downloads/month across pypi |
| 0/20 | Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem |
Inputs used
| packages | xrpl-py |
| dependents | — |
| ecosystems | pypi |
| total_downloads | — |
| monthly_downloads | 90,034 |
| 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?
79
How it's scored
| 36/54 | Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 13.9/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 38% of commits |
| 13.5/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 38 contributors |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 3 |
| contributors_sampled | 38 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.38 |
How it's scored
| 22.7/42 | Issue resolution — 54% of issues closed |
| 24.3/30 | PR acceptance — 621/766 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 15/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 621 |
| open_issues | 113 |
| closed_issues | 133 |
| prs_merged_7d | 0 |
| prs_decided_7d | 0 |
| prs_merged_30d | 1 |
| prs_decided_30d | 2 |
| issue_closed_ratio | 0.541 |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 145 |
| 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
76Good
How it's scored
| 30/30 | Ownership backing — organization-owned |
| 0/20 | Verified domain |
| 21.9/25 | Owner reach — 1,100 followers of XRPLF |
| 24.6/25 | Track record — 53 public repos, account ~6 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 1,100 |
| owner_type | Organization |
| is_verified | no |
| owner_login | XRPLF |
| public_repos | 53 |
| account_age_days | 2,292 |
Package maintenance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi |
| 35/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 29 days ago |
| 20/20 | Version history — 57 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | xrpl-py |
| ecosystems | pypi |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 29 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
92
Engineering practices
94Exceptional
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 6 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 16/16 | Linter config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.isort]) |
| 9.6/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| has_precommit_config | yes |
Documentation
90Excellent
How it's scored
| 30/30 | README |
| 25/25 | Documentation directory |
| 15/15 | Documentation / homepage site — https://xrpl-py.readthedocs.io |
| 10/10 | Repository description |
| 10/10 | Topics — 8 topics |
| 0/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | python, blockchain, cryptocurrency, ledger, xrpl, xrplf, xrp, xrp-ledger |
| has_wiki | no |
| homepage | — |
| docs_site | https://xrpl-py.readthedocs.io |
| 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?
70
Security posture
62Moderate
How it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 0/7.5 | Branch-Protection — no data |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Code-Review — all changesets reviewed |
| 2.5/2.5 | Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 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 — 12 commit(s) and 0 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 |
| 6/7.5 | Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts. |
| 0/7.5 | Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 1.5/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 8 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 17 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 1 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 6.2 |
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 |
| 25/25 | Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory |
| 0/40 | No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date |
Inputs used
| source | osv |
| advisories | 0 |
| affected_packages | 0 |
| assessed_packages | 14 |
| unassessed_packages | 0 |
| affected_by_severity | none |
| direct_affected_packages | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:xrpl-py@5.2.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 14 packages. 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.
75
Agent context & guidance
40Weak
How it's scored
| 0/45 | Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| 0/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) |
| 40/40 | Legible commit history — 79 of 79 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | no |
| llms_txt_url | — |
| legible_history_share | 1 |
| agent_instruction_files | — |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | — |
Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)
90Excellent
How it's scored
| 18/18 | One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 11/11 | Lint / format config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.isort]) |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — mypy.ini, py.typed, xrpl/account/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/account/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/clients/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/ledger/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/transaction/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/wallet/py.typed, xrpl/clients/py.typed, xrpl/core/addresscodec/py.typed, xrpl/core/binarycodec/py.typed, xrpl/core/keypairs/py.typed, xrpl/core/py.typed, xrpl/ledger/py.typed, xrpl/models/amounts/py.typed, xrpl/models/currencies/py.typed, xrpl/models/py.typed, xrpl/models/requests/py.typed, xrpl/models/transactions/py.typed, xrpl/py.typed, xrpl/transaction/py.typed, xrpl/utils/py.typed, xrpl/wallet/py.typed |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — lockfile |
| 10/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — 10 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| 8/8 | Automated maintenance — 16 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates |
| 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 | poetry.lock |
| has_dockerfile | no |
| typed_language | no |
| bootstrap_files | docs/Makefile |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| typecheck_configs | mypy.ini, py.typed, xrpl/account/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/account/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/clients/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/ledger/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/transaction/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/wallet/py.typed, xrpl/clients/py.typed, xrpl/core/addresscodec/py.typed, xrpl/core/binarycodec/py.typed, xrpl/core/keypairs/py.typed, xrpl/core/py.typed, xrpl/ledger/py.typed, xrpl/models/amounts/py.typed, xrpl/models/currencies/py.typed, xrpl/models/py.typed, xrpl/models/requests/py.typed, xrpl/models/transactions/py.typed, xrpl/py.typed, xrpl/transaction/py.typed, xrpl/utils/py.typed, xrpl/wallet/py.typed |
| agent_commit_share | 0.1 |
| toolchain_manifests | — |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0.16 |
Code legibility for models
82Excellent
How it's scored
| 27/45 | Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (mypy.ini, py.typed, xrpl/account/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/account/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/clients/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/ledger/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/transaction/py.typed, xrpl/asyncio/wallet/py.typed, xrpl/clients/py.typed, xrpl/core/addresscodec/py.typed, xrpl/core/binarycodec/py.typed, xrpl/core/keypairs/py.typed, xrpl/core/py.typed, xrpl/ledger/py.typed, xrpl/models/amounts/py.typed, xrpl/models/currencies/py.typed, xrpl/models/py.typed, xrpl/models/requests/py.typed, xrpl/models/transactions/py.typed, xrpl/py.typed, xrpl/transaction/py.typed, xrpl/utils/py.typed, xrpl/wallet/py.typed) |
| 54.9/55 | Manageable file sizes — 1/538 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Python |
| largest_source_bytes | 63,365 |
| source_files_sampled | 538 |
| oversized_source_files | 1 |
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 |
Inputs used
| example_dirs | examples |
| 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
247GitHub stars
38contributors
43commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
53releases
3bus factor
113open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
More detail
Star and fork history 0 ★ / 137 ⇿
0Stars
137Forks
52Releases
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 5Minor 23Patch 2
Each point covers 6 days.
OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate
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).
| 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 |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 10 | Code-Review | all changesets reviewed |
| 10 | Contributors | project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 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 | 12 commit(s) and 0 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 |
| 8 | Signed-Releases | 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts. |
| 0 | Token-Permissions | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 2 | Vulnerabilities | 8 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 8
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | base58 | ^2.1.0 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | ECPy | ^1.2.5 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | typing-extensions | ^4.15.0 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | httpx | >=0.18.1,<0.29.0 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | websockets | ^15.0.1 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | Deprecated | ^1.3.1 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | types-Deprecated | ^1.3.1.20260130 | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | pycryptodome | ^3.23.0 | pyproject.toml |
All dependencies 69
Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 61 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.
| Registry | Package | Version | Relation |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | base58 | 2.1.1 | direct |
| PyPI | deprecated | 1.3.1 | direct |
| PyPI | ecpy | 1.2.5 | direct |
| PyPI | httpx | 0.28.1 | direct |
| PyPI | pycryptodome | 3.23.0 | direct |
| PyPI | types-deprecated | 1.3.1.20260408 | direct |
| PyPI | typing-extensions | 4.15.0 | direct |
| PyPI | websockets | 15.0.1 | direct |
| PyPI | aiounittest | 1.5.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | alabaster | 0.7.16 | indirect |
| PyPI | anyio | 4.9.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | attrs | 25.3.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | babel | 2.17.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | black | 26.3.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | certifi | 2025.6.15 | indirect |
| PyPI | cffi | — | indirect |
| PyPI | charset-normalizer | 3.4.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | click | 8.1.8 | indirect |
| PyPI | colorama | 0.4.6 | indirect |
| PyPI | coverage | 7.13.5 | indirect |
| PyPI | docstring-parser-fork | 0.0.12 | indirect |
| PyPI | docutils | 0.21.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | exceptiongroup | 1.3.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | flake8 | 7.3.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | flake8-absolute-import | 1.0.0.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | flake8-annotations | 3.1.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | flake8-black | 0.4.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | flake8-docstrings | 1.7.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | flake8-isort | 6.1.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | h11 | 0.16.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | httpcore | 1.0.9 | indirect |
| PyPI | idna | 3.10 | indirect |
| PyPI | imagesize | 1.4.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | isort | 6.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | jinja2 | 3.1.6 | indirect |
| PyPI | librt | 0.9.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | markupsafe | 3.0.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | mccabe | 0.7.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | mypy | 1.20.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | mypy-extensions | 1.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | packaging | 26.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | pastel | 0.2.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | pathspec | 1.0.4 | indirect |
| PyPI | platformdirs | 4.3.8 | indirect |
| PyPI | poethepoet | 0.37.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pycodestyle | 2.14.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pydoclint | 0.7.6 | indirect |
| PyPI | pydocstyle | 6.3.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pyflakes | 3.4.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pygments | 2.20.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pytokens | 0.4.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | pyyaml | 6.0.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | requests | 2.33.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | setuptools | — | indirect |
| PyPI | sniffio | 1.3.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | snowballstemmer | 3.0.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinx | 7.4.7 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinx-rtd-theme | 3.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-applehelp | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-devhelp | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-htmlhelp | 2.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-jquery | 4.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-jsmath | 1.0.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-qthelp | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-serializinghtml | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | tomli | 2.2.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | urllib3 | 2.6.3 | indirect |
| PyPI | wrapt | 1.17.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | xrpl-py | — | indirect |
Dependency advisories 0
Installing pypi:xrpl-py@5.2.0 pulls in 14 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.
No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.
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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.
How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.