Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-07-25 07:56 UTC

castetsb / pyRobotiqGripper

Library to control Robotiq company grippers from python

PythonMIT★ 83 stars⑂ 25 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

castetsb/pyRobotiqGripper holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (24/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

65
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.

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

Ownership

OpenSource EngineerPersonal account
13 followers11 public repossince Mar 2018OpenSource Engineer

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIpyrobotiqgripper3.3.84,110360 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence — 10/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 188 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_year188
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year10

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 34 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~11.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tag3.3.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases11.9
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?

56Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
31/60Stars — 83 stars
11.5/25Forks — 25 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks25
stars83
watchers2
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
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.2/80Monthly downloads — 4,110 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespyrobotiqgripper
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads4,110
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.871
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
18/30PR acceptance — 3/5 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs3
open_issues0
closed_issues7
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): newcomer_pr_acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
8.2/25Owner reach — 13 followers of castetsb
19.9/25Track record — 11 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logincastetsb
public_repos11
account_age_days3,054
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

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 — 36 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespyrobotiqgripper
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

62Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no 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 — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): ci_tests, 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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages94
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 94 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.

24At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
5.3/40Legible commit history — 10 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
50/55Manageable file sizes — 1/11 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes126,049
source_files_sampled11
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

83GitHub stars
3contributors
188commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
0open 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:pyrobotiqgripper@3.3.8; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 25 ⇿
0Stars
25Forks
27Releases

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.

048121620242422018-122022-092026-07
Major 1Minor 3Patch 23

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.3 / 10
5.3aggregate

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 · 2026-07-25 07:56 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update 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
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpymodbus>=3.12.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpyserial>=3.5pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy>=1.28pyproject.toml
All dependencies 94

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 89 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPInumpy2.2.6direct
PyPInumpy2.4.6direct
PyPInumpy2.5.1direct
PyPIpymodbus3.14.0direct
PyPIpyserial3.5direct
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIasciichartpy1.5.25indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.2indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.3indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIevdev1.9.3indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfonttools4.63.0indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.5.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib3.10.9indirect
PyPImatplotlib3.11.1indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImouseinfo0.1.3indirect
PyPImyst-parser4.0.1indirect
PyPImyst-parser5.1.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpandas2.3.3indirect
PyPIpandas3.0.5indirect
PyPIpillow12.3.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpyautogui0.9.54indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygame-ce2.5.7indirect
PyPIpygetwindow0.0.9indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpymsgbox2.0.1indirect
PyPIpynput1.8.2indirect
PyPIpyobjc-core12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-applicationservices12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-cocoa12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-coretext12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-quartz12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2indirect
PyPIpyperclip1.11.0indirect
PyPIpyrect0.2.0indirect
PyPIpyrobotiqgripper3.3.8indirect
PyPIpyscreeze1.0.1indirect
PyPIpyside66.11.1indirect
PyPIpyside6-addons6.11.1indirect
PyPIpyside6-essentials6.11.1indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-xlib0.33indirect
PyPIpython3-xlib0.15indirect
PyPIpytweening1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytz2026.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIrubicon-objc0.5.6indirect
PyPIscipy1.15.3indirect
PyPIscipy1.17.1indirect
PyPIscipy1.18.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools83.0.0indirect
PyPIshiboken66.11.1indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsounddevice0.5.5indirect
PyPIsphinx8.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinx9.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinx9.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme3.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jquery4.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-youtube1.5.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 94 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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