Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-12 21:50 UTC

ansible-community / molecule-plugins

Collection of molecule plugins

PythonMIT★ 164 stars⑂ 113 forkssince Apr 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindPluginCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#azure#docker#gce#molecule-plugin#ec2#pep-621

ansible-community/molecule-plugins 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 AI Readiness (61/100). It was last updated today. 10 contributors account for most of its recent work.

94
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

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)
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Community managed Ansible repositoriesOrganization · verified domain
350 followers128 public repossince Feb 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPImolecule-plugins26.10.12752,120130 days agoansiblemoleculeplugintesting

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

65Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
13.9/18Commit volume — 34 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year34
human_commit_share0.9
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year7

Release discipline

84Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 14 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~140.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tagv26.10.12
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases140.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

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

71Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

60Moderate
How it's scored
35.9/60Stars — 164 stars
17.1/25Forks — 113 forks
7/15Watchers — 19 watchers
Inputs used
forks113
stars164
watchers19
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

65Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

98Exceptional
How it's scored
78.4/80Monthly downloads — 752,120 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmolecule-plugins
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads752,120
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?

90Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

96Exceptional
How it's scored
54/54Bus factor — 10 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 16% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 63 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor10
contributors_sampled63
top_contributor_share0.159

Issue & PR responsiveness

71Good
How it's scored
22/42Issue resolution — 52% of issues closed
23.9/30PR acceptance — 142/178 decided PRs merged
11.6/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 8/9 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 28/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs142
open_issues80
closed_issues88
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d12
prs_decided_30d15
issue_closed_ratio0.524
closed_unmerged_prs36
first_time_authors_30d5
first_time_prs_merged_30d8
first_time_prs_decided_30d9

Ownership & stewardship

93Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
18.3/25Owner reach — 350 followers of ansible-community
25/25Track record — 128 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers350
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginansible-community
public_repos128
account_age_days3,163

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 — 13 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmolecule-plugins
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — biome.json, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.ansible.com/projects/molecule/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsazure, docker, gce, molecule-plugin, ec2, pep-621
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.ansible.com/projects/molecule/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

73Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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
6.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 28/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 16 contributing companies or organizations
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 — 22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate7.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories6
affected_packages1
assessed_packages118
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 118 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 88 of 90 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.978
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

69Good
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — biome.json, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
11/11Static type checking — src/molecule_plugins/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 3 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/molecule_plugins/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.03
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/molecule_plugins/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/68 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes10,423
source_files_sampled68
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

164GitHub stars
63contributors
34commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
14releases
10bus factor
80open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:molecule-plugins@26.10.12; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 113 ⇿
0Stars
113Forks
12Releases

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.

02040608010012011332022-042024-072026-09
Major 2Minor 4Patch 5

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-12 21:50 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
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 28/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesinternal error: internal error: invalid Dockerfile
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPImolecule>=25.1.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 118

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 117 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPImolecule26.8.0direct
PyPIansible-compat26.8.0indirect
PyPIansible-core2.16.19indirect
PyPIansible-core2.19.12indirect
PyPIansible-core2.21.3indirect
PyPIansible-lint26.8.0indirect
PyPIargcomplete3.7.2indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.8.0indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.4indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbackports-tarfile1.2.0indirect
PyPIbindep2.14.0indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIbracex3.0.1indirect
PyPIbuild1.6.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcodespell2.4.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.1indirect
PyPIdecorator5.3.1indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdistro1.9.0indirect
PyPIdocker7.2.0indirect
PyPIdocstring-parser-fork0.0.16indirect
PyPIdocutils0.23indirect
PyPIdogpile-cache1.5.0indirect
PyPIenrich1.2.7indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.5indirect
PyPIgoogle-auth2.57.0indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata9.0.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIiso86012.1.0indirect
PyPIisort9.0.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.1.2indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.6.0indirect
PyPIjeepney0.9.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjmespath1.1.0indirect
PyPIjsonpatch1.33indirect
PyPIjsonpointer3.1.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIkeyring25.7.0indirect
PyPIkeystoneauth15.14.0indirect
PyPIkeystoneauth15.17.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.15.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImore-itertools11.1.0indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInh30.3.7indirect
PyPIopenstacksdk4.13.0indirect
PyPIopenstacksdk4.20.0indirect
PyPIos-service-types1.8.2indirect
PyPIos-service-types1.9.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIparsley1.3indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpbr7.0.3indirect
PyPIpip26.2.1indirect
PyPIpipx1.17.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprek0.5.1indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIpyasn10.6.4indirect
PyPIpyasn1-modules0.4.2indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydoclint0.9.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.8indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-helpers-namespace2021.12.29indirect
PyPIpython-vagrant1.0.0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpywin32312indirect
PyPIpywin32-ctypes0.2.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer46.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIresolvelib1.0.1indirect
PyPIresolvelib1.2.1indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml0.19.1indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml-clib0.2.15indirect
PyPIruff0.16.5indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.5.0indirect
PyPIselinux0.3.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools84.0.0indirect
PyPIstevedore5.8.0indirect
PyPIstevedore5.9.1indirect
PyPIsubprocess-tee0.4.2indirect
PyPItombi1.5.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItwine7.0.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuserpath1.9.2indirect
PyPIwcmatch11.0.1indirect
PyPIyamllint1.38.0indirect
PyPIzipp4.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 118 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
urllib32.7.0indirecthigh62.8.0

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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with ansible-community/molecule-plugins. Read them side by side →

99ansible/moleculeAn ansible-native testing framework for collections, playbooks, and roles with configurable workflows for testing any system or serviceExceptional98ansible/ansible-lintansible-lint checks playbooks for practices and behavior that could potentially be improved and can fix some of the most common ones for youExceptional97ansible/pytest-ansibleA pytest plugin that enables the use of ansible in tests, enables the use of pytest as a collection unit test runner, and exposes molecule scenarios through a pytest fixture.Exceptional96testcontainers/testcontainers-pythonTestcontainers is a Python library that providing a friendly API to run Docker container. It is designed to create runtime environment to use during your automatic tests.Exceptional96floci-io/flociLight, fluffy, and always free - The AWS Local Emulator alternativeExceptional96ansible/ansible-navigatorA text-based user interface (TUI) for Ansible.Exceptional

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.