Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-13 02:10 UTC

dfch / biz.dfch.SpecMgr

An ISO 29148 based artifact manager for system specifications.

PythonAGPL-3.0★ 2 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Aug 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

dfch/biz.dfch.SpecMgr holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (96/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (45/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Ronald RinkPersonal account
0 followers43 public repossince Jul 2014d-fens GmbH @dfensgmbh

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence — 11/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 453 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year453
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 39 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~3.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tagv0.36.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases3.4

Community & Adoption

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

45Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 2 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars2
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
46.1/80Monthly downloads — 2,853 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbiz-dfch-specmgr
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads2,853
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?

52Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.993
How it's scored
31.2/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
29.1/30PR acceptance — 94/97 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs94
open_issues29
closed_issues84
prs_merged_7d12
prs_decided_7d12
prs_merged_30d41
prs_decided_30d41
issue_closed_ratio0.743
closed_unmerged_prs3
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
0/25Owner reach — 0 followers of dfch
24/25Track record — 43 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_logindfch
public_repos43
account_age_days4,457
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 — 40 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbiz-dfch-specmgr
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 5 out of 5 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

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — http://d-fens.ch
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmcp, mcp-server, python, requirements-engineering, requirements-management, iso29148
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://d-fens.ch
docs_sitehttp://d-fens.ch
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 5 out of 5 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
2/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.3

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_packages120
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 120 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.

86Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://modelcontextprotocol.io/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 94 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://modelcontextprotocol.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.949
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes94,297
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
11/11Static type checking — src/biz/dfch/specmgr/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/biz/dfch/specmgr/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/biz/dfch/specmgr/py.typed)
54.8/55Manageable file sizes — 3/1,070 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes85,441
source_files_sampled1,070
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

2GitHub stars
2contributors
453commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
39releases
1bus factor
29open 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:biz-dfch-specmgr@0.36.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

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 · 2026-10-13 02:10 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests5 out of 5 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 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpydantic>=2.11pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv>=1.2.2pyproject.toml
PyPImarkdown-it-py>=3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-frontmatter>=1.1pyproject.toml
PyPImdformat>=1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPImdformat-simple-breaks==0.1.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 120

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 114 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0direct
PyPImdformat1.0.0direct
PyPImdformat-simple-breaks0.1.0direct
PyPIpydantic2.13.4direct
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2direct
PyPIpython-frontmatter1.3.0direct
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.5indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.4indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbackports-tarfile1.2.0indirect
PyPIbiz-dfch-specmgr0.36.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.5.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.3indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdocutils0.23indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIfastembed0.8.0indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.2indirect
PyPIflatbuffers25.12.19indirect
PyPIfsspec2026.9.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhf-xet1.6.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpcore22.12.0indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIhttpx22.12.0indirect
PyPIhttpx2-jsfetch1.0indirect
PyPIhuggingface-hub1.32.0indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata9.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort8.0.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.1.2indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.6.0indirect
PyPIjeepney0.9.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIkeyring25.7.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPIloguru0.7.3indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImcp2.0.0indirect
PyPImcp-types2.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImmh35.3.0indirect
PyPImore-itertools11.1.0indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInh30.3.6indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.5.3indirect
PyPIonnxruntime1.30.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.44.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIparameterized0.9.0indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpillow12.3.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.1indirect
PyPIprotobuf7.36.2indirect
PyPIpy-rust-stemmers0.1.8indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.15.0indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.6indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.6.1indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.32indirect
PyPIpywin32312indirect
PyPIpywin32-ctypes0.2.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer45.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruff0.16.1indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.5.0indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsse-starlette3.4.6indirect
PyPIstarlette1.3.1indirect
PyPItokenizers0.23.2indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItqdm4.70.1indirect
PyPItruststore0.10.4indirect
PyPItwine7.0.0indirect
PyPItyper0.27.0indirect
PyPItypes-pyyaml6.0.12.20260724indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.8.0indirect
PyPIuv0.12.1indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.52.1indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.13indirect
PyPIvulture2.16indirect
PyPIwin32-setctime1.2.0indirect
PyPIzipp4.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 120 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

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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