Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 06:54 UTC

ansible / pytest-ansible

A 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.

PythonMIT★ 226 stars⑂ 75 forkssince Jul 2014View on GitHub ↗

KindPluginLibraryhow this is determined

#ansible-dev-tools

ansible/pytest-ansible holds a health index of 97 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (93/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (71/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

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.

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 85 is calibrated to 97 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

AnsibleOrganization · verified domain

3,755 followers305 public repossince Mar 2012

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	pytest-ansible	26.8.0	611,426	56	33 days ago	ansible pytest testing

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

88Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
24.2/36	Commit cadence — 35/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18	Commit volume — 94 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 28 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	94
human_commit_share	0.43
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	35

Release discipline

100Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 42 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 33 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~39.5 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	42
latest_release_tag	v26.8.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	33
mean_days_between_releases	39.5

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?

72Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

62Moderate

How it's scored

38.2/60	Stars — 226 stars
15.6/25	Forks — 75 forks
8.1/15	Watchers — 30 watchers

Inputs used

forks	75
stars	226
watchers	30
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

65Good

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	4
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

96Exceptional

How it's scored

77.2/80	Monthly downloads — 611,426 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	pytest-ansible
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	611,426
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?

86Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

60Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.4/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 49% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 33 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 26 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	33
top_contributor_share	0.493

Issue & PR responsiveness

91Excellent

How it's scored

39.1/42	Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
24.9/30	PR acceptance — 434/522 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	434
open_issues	5
closed_issues	67
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	2
prs_decided_30d	2
issue_closed_ratio	0.931
closed_unmerged_prs	88
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

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20	Verified domain
25/25	Owner reach — 3,755 followers of ansible
25/25	Track record — 305 public repos, account ~14 yr old

Inputs used

followers	3,755
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	yes
owner_login	ansible
public_repos	305
account_age_days	5,305

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 33 days ago
20/20	Version history — 56 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	pytest-ansible
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	33

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
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://ansible.readthedocs.io/projects/pytest-ansible/
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 1 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	ansible-dev-tools
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://ansible.readthedocs.io/projects/pytest-ansible/
docs_site	https://ansible.readthedocs.io/projects/pytest-ansible/
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?

82Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

77Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
6/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
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 26 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 — 28 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
4.5/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	7.7

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. 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	23
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:pytest-ansible@26.8.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 23 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.

71Good · 4% of overall

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 — 43 of 43 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 — mise.toml
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
11/11	Static type checking — src/pytest_ansible/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8	Automated maintenance — 55 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	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	mise.toml
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	src/pytest_ansible/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0.05
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.55

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/pytest_ansible/py.typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/32 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	26,705
source_files_sampled	32
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

226GitHub stars

33contributors

94commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

42releases

2bus factor

5open 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 ★ / 75 ⇿

0Stars

75Forks

41Releases

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 2Minor 19Patch 20

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.7 / 10

7.7aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 06:53 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
8	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
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 26 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	28 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
9	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 7

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	ansible-compat	`>=25.8.2`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	ansible-core	`>=2.16.19,!=2.17.*`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	cffi	`>=1.15.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	packaging	`>=23.2`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pytest	`>=6`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pytest-xdist	`>=3.8.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	typing-extensions	`>=4.15.0`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 147

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 138 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	ansible-compat	`26.8.0`	direct
PyPI	ansible-core	`2.16.19`	direct
PyPI	ansible-core	`2.19.11`	direct
PyPI	ansible-core	`2.21.2`	direct
PyPI	cffi	`2.1.0`	direct
PyPI	packaging	`26.2`	direct
PyPI	pytest	`9.1.1`	direct
PyPI	pytest-xdist	`3.8.0`	direct
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.16.0`	direct
PyPI	argcomplete	`3.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	ast-serialize	`0.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	astroid	`4.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	attrs	`26.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	babel	`2.18.0`	indirect
PyPI	backports-tarfile	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	backrefs	`7.0`	indirect
PyPI	beautifulsoup4	`4.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	bracex	`3.0`	indirect
PyPI	build	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	cachetools	`7.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	cairocffi	`1.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	cairosvg	`2.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2026.6.17`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.9`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	cryptography	`50.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	csscompressor	`0.9.5`	indirect
PyPI	cssselect2	`0.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	defusedxml	`0.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	dill	`0.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.4.3`	indirect
PyPI	dnspython	`2.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	docstring-parser-fork	`0.0.16`	indirect
PyPI	docutils	`0.23`	indirect
PyPI	enrich	`1.2.7`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	execnet	`2.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.30.0`	indirect
PyPI	ghp-import	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	griffelib	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	hjson	`3.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	htmlmin2	`0.1.13`	indirect
PyPI	id	`1.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.18`	indirect
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`9.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	isort	`8.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	jaraco-classes	`3.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	jaraco-context	`6.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	jaraco-functools	`4.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	jeepney	`0.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	jsmin	`3.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema	`4.26.0`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema-specifications	`2025.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	keyring	`25.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	librt	`0.13.0`	indirect
PyPI	linkchecker	`10.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown	`3.10.2`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-exec	`1.12.3`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-include	`0.8.1`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`3.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	mccabe	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mergedeep	`1.3.4`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs	`1.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-ansible	`25.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-ansible	`26.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-autorefs	`1.4.4`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-gen-files	`0.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-get-deps	`0.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-htmlproofer-plugin	`1.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-macros-plugin	`1.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material	`9.7.7`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material-extensions	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-minify-plugin	`0.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-monorepo-plugin	`1.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocstrings	`1.0.6`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocstrings-python	`2.0.5`	indirect
PyPI	molecule	`26.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	more-itertools	`11.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`2.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	nh3	`0.3.6`	indirect
PyPI	paginate	`0.5.7`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pillow	`12.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	pip	`26.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	pipx	`1.17.2`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	prek	`0.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	properdocs	`1.6.7`	indirect
PyPI	pycparser	`3.0`	indirect
PyPI	pydoclint	`0.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.20.0`	indirect
PyPI	pylint	`4.0.8`	indirect
PyPI	pymdown-extensions	`11.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	pyproject-api	`1.10.1`	indirect
PyPI	pyproject-hooks	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-github-actions-annotate-failures	`0.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-plus	`0.8.1`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	indirect
PyPI	python-discovery	`1.4.4`	indirect
PyPI	python-slugify	`8.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	pywin32-ctypes	`0.2.3`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml-env-tag	`1.1`	indirect
PyPI	readme-renderer	`45.0`	indirect
PyPI	referencing	`0.37.0`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.34.2`	indirect
PyPI	requests-toolbelt	`1.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	resolvelib	`1.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	resolvelib	`1.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	rfc3986	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`15.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	rpds-py	`0.30.0`	indirect
PyPI	rpds-py	`2026.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.16.6`	indirect
PyPI	secretstorage	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`83.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	soupsieve	`2.8.4`	indirect
PyPI	subprocess-tee	`0.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	super-collections	`0.6.2`	indirect
PyPI	termcolor	`3.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	text-unidecode	`1.3`	indirect
PyPI	tinycss2	`1.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	tombi	`1.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	toml-sort	`0.24.4`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	tomli-w	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	tomlkit	`0.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	tox	`4.61.2`	indirect
PyPI	twine	`7.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	types-pyyaml	`6.0.12.20260906`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	userpath	`1.9.2`	indirect
PyPI	uv	`0.12.10`	indirect
PyPI	virtualenv	`21.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	watchdog	`6.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	wcmatch	`11.0`	indirect
PyPI	webencodings	`0.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	zipp	`4.1.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pytest-ansible@26.8.0 pulls in 23 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.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records