Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-17 21:16 UTC

broadinstitute / viral-ngs

viral-ngs: command line tools and wrappers for processing raw viral genomic data

PythonMIT★ 198 stars⑂ 67 forkssince Sep 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined

broadinstitute/viral-ngs holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on Security (55/100). It was last updated 10 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Broad InstituteOrganization
1,300 followers1,526 public repossince Sep 2010

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 10 days ago
22.8/36Commit cadence33/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume572 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year572
human_commit_share0.96
days_since_last_push10
active_weeks_last_year33

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 13 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~13.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv3.0.20
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release13
mean_days_between_releases13.8
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
37.2/60Stars198 stars
15.2/25Forks67 forks
7.9/15Watchers27 watchers
Inputs used
forks67
stars198
watchers27
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

78Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 49% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth16 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.492
How it's scored
41.5/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
27.9/30PR acceptance779/839 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs779
open_issues3
closed_issues266
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio0.989
closed_unmerged_prs60
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
22.4/25Owner reach1,300 followers of broadinstitute
25/25Track record1,526 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,300
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginbroadinstitute
public_repos1,526
account_age_days5,821
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://viral-ngs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics15 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsviral-ngs, viral, genomics, genome, genome-assembly, genome-sequencing, bam, fastq, variant-calling, variant-annotations, illumina, bioinformatics, docker, ngs, python
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://viral-ngs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
docs_sitehttps://viral-ngs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
5.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories3 affected: pyyaml 5.1 (critical 9.8), jinja2 3.1.4 (high 8.8), biopython 1.72 (moderate 4.9)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
25.2/40No advisories left outstanding3 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,371 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories16
affected_packages4
assessed_packages53
unassessed_packages92
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 2, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 53 resolved dependencies against OSV. 92 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

75Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32.2/40Legible commit history58 of 96 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.604
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes22,057
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingsrc/viral_ngs/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configssrc/viral_ngs/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.07
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (src/viral_ngs/py.typed)
51.4/55Manageable file sizes8/122 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes391,231
source_files_sampled122
oversized_source_files8

Key facts

198GitHub stars
16contributors
572commits, last 12 months
10days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
3open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch pypi package 'viral-ngs' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 67 ⇿
0Stars
67Forks
97Releases

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.

01020304050606022014-122020-092026-07
Major 2Minor 26Patch 69

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-08-17 21:16 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
8Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 13
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIarrow>=0.12.1pyproject.toml
PyPIbiopython>=1.72pyproject.toml
PyPIjinja2>=2.11.3pyproject.toml
PyPIlz4>=2.2.1pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib>=2.2.4pyproject.toml
PyPIpandas>=2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpsutil>=6.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpybedtools>=0.7.10pyproject.toml
PyPIpysam>=0.23.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml>=6.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy>=1.10.0pyproject.toml
PyPIseaborn>=0.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIzstandard>=0.23.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 145

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 21 direct and 124 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIarrowdirect
PyPIarrow0.12.1direct
PyPIbiopythondirect
PyPIbiopython1.72direct
PyPIjinja2direct
PyPIjinja23.1.4direct
PyPIlz4direct
PyPImatplotlibdirect
PyPImatplotlib2.2.4direct
PyPIpandasdirect
PyPIpsutildirect
PyPIpybedtoolsdirect
PyPIpybedtools0.7.10direct
PyPIpysamdirect
PyPIpysam0.15.0direct
PyPIpyyamldirect
PyPIpyyaml5.1direct
PyPIpyyaml6.0.1direct
PyPIscipydirect
PyPIseaborndirect
PyPIzstandarddirect
PyPIanndataindirect
PyPIawscliindirect
PyPIbamtoolsindirect
PyPIbbmapindirect
PyPIbbmap38.56indirect
PyPIbcftoolsindirect
PyPIbedtoolsindirect
PyPIbedtools2.28.0indirect
PyPIblastindirect
PyPIblast2.7.1indirect
PyPIbmtaggerindirect
PyPIbmtagger3.101indirect
PyPIboto3indirect
PyPIbwaindirect
PyPIbwa0.7.17indirect
PyPIcd-hitindirect
PyPIcd-hit4.6.8indirect
PyPIcd-hit-auxtoolsindirect
PyPIcd-hit-auxtools4.6.8indirect
PyPIcentrifugerindirect
PyPIcryptographyindirect
PyPIcsvkitindirect
PyPIdiamond0.9.10indirect
PyPIduckdbindirect
PyPIfastaniindirect
PyPIfastqcindirect
PyPIfastqc0.11.7indirect
PyPIfgbioindirect
PyPIfilechunkioindirect
PyPIfreebayesindirect
PyPIfuture0.16.0indirect
PyPIgap2seqindirect
PyPIgap2seq3.1.1a2indirect
PyPIgatk3.8indirect
PyPIgenomadindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-sdkindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-storageindirect
PyPIillumina-interop1.5.0indirect
PyPIjqindirect
PyPIkaiju1.6.3_yesimonindirect
PyPIkallistoindirect
PyPIkb-pythonindirect
PyPIkmaindirect
PyPIkmcindirect
PyPIkmc3.1.1rc1indirect
PyPIkraken2indirect
PyPIkrakenuniq0.5.7_yesimonindirect
PyPIkronaindirect
PyPIkrona2.7.1indirect
PyPIlastindirect
PyPIlast876indirect
PyPIlbzip2indirect
PyPIlbzip22.5indirect
PyPIlofreqindirect
PyPIlz4-cindirect
PyPIlz4-c1.9.1indirect
PyPImafftindirect
PyPImafft7.402indirect
PyPIminimap2indirect
PyPIminiwdlindirect
PyPImockindirect
PyPImock5.0.1indirect
PyPImummer4indirect
PyPImummer44.0.0beta2indirect
PyPImuscleindirect
PyPImuscle3.8.1551indirect
PyPImvicunaindirect
PyPImvicuna1.0indirect
PyPInovoalignindirect
PyPInovoalign3.07.00indirect
PyPIparallelindirect
PyPIparallel20160622indirect
PyPIperl-bio-easelindirect
PyPIpicardindirect
PyPIpicard-slim2.21.1indirect
PyPIpigzindirect
PyPIpigz2.4indirect
PyPIpillowindirect
PyPIprinseqindirect
PyPIprinseq0.20.4indirect
PyPIpyasn1indirect
PyPIpyopensslindirect
PyPIpysftpindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpytest-covindirect
PyPIpytest-xdistindirect
PyPIpython3.12indirect
PyPIr-base3.5.1indirect
PyPIrasusaindirect
PyPIrecommonmarkindirect
PyPIrpds-pyindirect
PyPIsambambaindirect
PyPIsamtoolsindirect
PyPIsamtools1.9indirect
PyPIsequipindirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPIskaniindirect
PyPIsnakemake5.6.0indirect
PyPIsnpeffindirect
PyPIsnpeff4.3.1tindirect
PyPIsourmash-minimalindirect
PyPIspadesindirect
PyPIspades3.12.0indirect
PyPIsphinx1.4.4indirect
PyPIsphinx7.4.7indirect
PyPIsphinx-argparse0.1.15indirect
PyPIsphinx-argparse0.5.2indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-themeindirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme0.1.9indirect
PyPIsplitcodeindirect
PyPItable2asnindirect
PyPItbl2asn25.6indirect
PyPItensorflowindirect
PyPItornadoindirect
PyPItrimmomaticindirect
PyPItrimmomatic0.38indirect
PyPIudockerindirect
PyPIunzipindirect
PyPIunzip6.0indirect
PyPIurllib3indirect
PyPIvphaser2indirect
PyPIvphaser22.0indirect
PyPIwgsimindirect
PyPIzstdindirect
Dependency advisories 4

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 53 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 4 carry known advisories, of which 3 are direct. 92 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
pyyaml5.1directcritical65.2b1
jinja23.1.4directhigh63.1.6
future0.16.0indirecthigh20.18.3
biopython1.72directmoderate21.87

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.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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