Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 12:37 UTC

erpipe-org / mcp-odoo

Odoo MCP for AI agents — gated writes, multi-instance. Hosted product: https://erpipe.com

PythonMIT★ 410 stars⑂ 187 forkssince Mar 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolMCP serverLibraryhow this is determined
#mcp#mcp-server#mcp-servers#odoo#odoo-mcp#agent-skills#claude-code#chatgpt#erpipe

erpipe-org/mcp-odoo holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (94/100) and lowest on Security (48/100). It was last updated 20 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

erpipe-orgOrganization
1 follower4 public repossince Jul 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIodoo-mcp1.3.02,6062147 days agoodoomcpservermodel-context-protocolchatgptclaudeerpipe

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

65Good
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 20 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 106 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year106
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push20
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 21 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 26 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~7.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tagv1.3.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release26
mean_days_between_releases7.7
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?

74Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

68Good
How it's scored
42.4/60Stars — 410 stars
18.9/25Forks — 187 forks
6.8/15Watchers — 18 watchers
Inputs used
forks187
stars410
watchers18
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR 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_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

57Moderate
How it's scored
45.5/80Monthly downloads — 2,606 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesodoo-mcp
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads2,606
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

62Moderate
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 31% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 8 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.308

Issue & PR responsiveness

51Moderate
How it's scored
36.8/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
12.5/30PR acceptance — 10/24 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs10
open_issues2
closed_issues14
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.875
closed_unmerged_prs14
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1

Ownership & stewardship

38Weak
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
2.2/25Owner reach — 1 followers of erpipe-org
5.4/25Track record — 4 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers1
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginerpipe-org
public_repos4
account_age_days54

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 47 days ago
20/20Version history — 21 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesodoo-mcp
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish47

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

94Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

90Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://erpipe.com/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmcp, mcp-server, mcp-servers, odoo, odoo-mcp, agent-skills, claude-code, chatgpt, erpipe
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://erpipe.com/
docs_sitehttps://erpipe.com/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

48Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

35Weak
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 — 4 out of 4 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
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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 — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
2/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 29 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages32
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:odoo-mcp@1.3.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 32 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.

70Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://erpipe.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 89 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://erpipe.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.89
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes963

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

43Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, 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_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

54Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
53.6/55Manageable file sizes — 2/78 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes149,307
source_files_sampled78
oversized_source_files2

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

410GitHub stars
8contributors
106commits, last 12 months
20days since last push
21releases
3bus factor
2open 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 ★ / 187 ⇿
0Stars
187Forks
21Releases

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.

0408012016020018552025-032025-122026-09
Major 1Minor 12Patch 8

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10
3.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 12:36 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities29 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPImcp>=2,<3pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.31.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 82

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 80 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPImcp2.0.0direct
PyPIrequests2.33.1direct
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.13.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbackports-tarfile1.2.0indirect
PyPIblack26.3.1indirect
PyPIbuild1.4.4indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.4.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.7indirect
PyPIclick8.3.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcrewai—indirect
PyPIcrewai-tools—indirect
PyPIcryptography47.0.0indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore22.9.1indirect
PyPIhttpx22.9.1indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata9.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort8.0.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.1.2indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.4.0indirect
PyPIjeepney0.9.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIkeyring25.7.0indirect
PyPIlangchain-mcp-adapters—indirect
PyPIlangchain-openai—indirect
PyPIlanggraph—indirect
PyPIlibrt0.9.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImcp-types2.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImore-itertools11.0.2indirect
PyPImypy1.20.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInh30.3.5indirect
PyPIodoo-mcp—indirect
PyPIodoo-mcp1.3.2indirect
PyPIopenai-agents—indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.44.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.9.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.3indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.3indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.12.1indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.27indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpywin32311indirect
PyPIpywin32-ctypes0.2.3indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer44.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIruff0.15.12indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.5.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsse-starlette3.4.1indirect
PyPIstarlette1.0.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItruststore0.10.4indirect
PyPItwine6.2.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.46.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:odoo-mcp@1.3.0 pulls in 32 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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with erpipe-org/mcp-odoo. Read them side by side →

96mcp-use/mcp-useThe fullstack MCP framework to develop MCP Apps for ChatGPT / Claude & MCP Servers for AI Agents.Exceptional94jgravelle/jcodemunch-mcpCut AI token costs 95%+ on code exploration. The leading MCP server for precise, symbol-level GitHub code retrieval via tree-sitter AST. Works with Claude Code, Cursor & any MCP client. 313B+ tokens saved.Exceptional96alpic-ai/skybridgeSkybridge is a full-stack TypeScript framework for MCP Apps and ChatGPT Apps. Type-safe. React-powered. Platform-agnostic.Exceptional96PrefectHQ/fastmcp🚀 The fast, Pythonic way to build MCP servers and clients.Exceptional95zereight/gitlab-mcpFirst gitlab mcp for you, building togetherExceptional95apify/apify-mcp-serverThe Apify MCP server enables your AI agents to extract data from social media, search engines, maps, e-commerce sites, or any other website using thousands of ready-made scrapers, crawlers, and automation tools available on the Apify Store.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.