Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 20:21 UTC

fastapiutils / fastapi-utils

Reusable utilities for FastAPI

PythonMIT★ 2,310 stars⑂ 189 forkssince Jan 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined
#fastapi

fastapiutils/fastapi-utils holds a health index of 29 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (76/100) and lowest on Vitality (25/100). It was last updated 563 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

29
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

29
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 49 is calibrated to 48 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

fastapiutilsOrganization
4 followers1 public reposince Nov 2024

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIfastapi-utilspoints to another repo — not scored0.8.0-7675 days agofastapiooprestful

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

25At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

1Critical
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 563 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.838
days_since_last_push563
active_weeks_last_year0

Release discipline

60Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 3 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 675 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~91.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tag0.8.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release675
mean_days_between_releases91.9
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?

76Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

81Excellent
How it's scored
54.6/60Stars — 2,310 stars
19/25Forks — 189 forks
7.1/15Watchers — 20 watchers
Inputs used
forks189
stars2,310
watchers20
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
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_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, codecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

29At Risk · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

24At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 64% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.636

Issue & PR responsiveness

23At Risk
How it's scored
16.7/42Issue resolution — 40% of issues closed
3.1/30PR acceptance — 28/272 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs28
open_issues53
closed_issues35
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.398
closed_unmerged_prs244
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.

Ownership & stewardship

41Weak
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
5/25Owner reach — 4 followers of fastapiutils
5.9/25Track record — 1 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginfastapiutils
public_repos1
account_age_days679

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

64Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://fastapiutils.github.io/fastapi-utils/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 1 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfastapi
has_wikino
homepagehttps://fastapiutils.github.io/fastapi-utils/
docs_sitehttps://fastapiutils.github.io/fastapi-utils/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

33At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/29 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 — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 42 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate3.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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_packages11
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:fastapi-utils@0.8.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 11 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.

65Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

36Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.1/40Legible commit history — 21 of 31 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.677
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

80Excellent
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black])
11/11Static type checking — fastapi_utils/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 37
8/8Automated maintenance — 6 of the last 37 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespoetry.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsfastapi_utils/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.162

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (fastapi_utils/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/47 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes8,112
source_files_sampled47
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2,310GitHub stars
3contributors
0commits, last 12 months
563days since last push
3releases
1bus factor
53open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • pypi package 'fastapi-utils' points at a different repository (https://github.com/dmontagu/fastapi-utils); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 189 ⇿
0Stars
189Forks
3Releases

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.

0408012016016042020-012023-052026-08
Major 0Minor 3Patch 0

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
3.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 20:20 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
0CI-Tests0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 2/29 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
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities42 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIfastapi>=0.89,<1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>1.0, <3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIsqlalchemy>=1.4,<3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpsutil>=5,<7pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic-settings^2.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-inspect^0.9.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 121

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 112 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIfastapi0.103.2direct
PyPIfastapi0.115.4direct
PyPIpsutil5.9.6direct
PyPIpsutil6.1.0direct
PyPIpydantic2.5.2direct
PyPIpydantic2.9.2direct
PyPIpydantic-settings2.6.1direct
PyPIsqlalchemy2.0.36direct
PyPItyping-inspect0.9.0direct
PyPIaiofiles23.2.1indirect
PyPIaiofiles24.1.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.5.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio3.7.1indirect
PyPIanyio4.5.2indirect
PyPIautoflake1.7.8indirect
PyPIbabel2.14.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.16.0indirect
PyPIblack23.3.0indirect
PyPIblack24.8.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2023.11.17indirect
PyPIcertifi2024.8.30indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.3.2indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.0indirect
PyPIclick8.1.7indirect
PyPIcodecov2.1.13indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.2.7indirect
PyPIcoverage7.6.1indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.2.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.2.2indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgreenlet3.1.1indirect
PyPIh110.14.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore0.17.3indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.6indirect
PyPIhttpx0.24.1indirect
PyPIhttpx0.27.2indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIidna3.6indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata6.7.0indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.5.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.0.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.4indirect
PyPImarkdown3.4.4indirect
PyPImarkdown3.7indirect
PyPImarkdown-include0.8.1indirect
PyPImarkupsafe2.1.3indirect
PyPImarkupsafe2.1.5indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.5.3indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.0indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.2.7indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.5.44indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.2indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImock5.1.0indirect
PyPImypy1.13.0indirect
PyPImypy1.4.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.0.0indirect
PyPIpackaging23.2indirect
PyPIpackaging24.2indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.6indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpathspec0.11.2indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.0.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.3.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.2.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.14.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.23.4indirect
PyPIpyflakes2.5.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.17.2indirect
PyPIpygments2.18.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.12indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.2.1indirect
PyPIpytest7.4.3indirect
PyPIpytest7.4.4indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio0.21.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio0.21.2indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio0.23.8indirect
PyPIpytest-cov4.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov5.0.0indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout2.3.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.8.2indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.0.1indirect
PyPIpytz2023.3.post1indirect
PyPIpytz2024.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag0.1indirect
PyPIregex2022.10.31indirect
PyPIregex2024.11.6indirect
PyPIrequests2.31.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.3indirect
PyPIruff0.1.8indirect
PyPIruff0.7.3indirect
PyPIsix1.16.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy-stubs0.4indirect
PyPIstarlette0.27.0indirect
PyPIstarlette0.41.2indirect
PyPItomli2.0.1indirect
PyPItomli2.0.2indirect
PyPItyped-ast1.5.5indirect
PyPItypes-mock5.1.0.3indirect
PyPItypes-setuptools69.0.0.0indirect
PyPItypes-setuptools75.3.0.20241107indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.12.2indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.7.1indirect
PyPIurllib32.0.7indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.3indirect
PyPIwatchdog3.0.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog4.0.2indirect
PyPIzipp3.15.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.20.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:fastapi-utils@0.8.0 pulls in 11 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 fastapiutils/fastapi-utils. Read them side by side →

99pydantic/logfireAI observability platform for production LLM and agent systems.Exceptional99IBM/mcp-context-forgeAn AI Gateway, registry, and proxy that sits in front of any MCP, A2A, or REST/gRPC APIs, exposing a unified endpoint with centralized discovery, guardrails and management. Optimizes Agent & Tool calling, and supports plugins.Exceptional98strawberry-graphql/strawberryA GraphQL library for Python that leverages type annotations 🍓Exceptional98polarsource/polarPolar — A billing platform for the intelligence eraExceptional98supabase/supabase-pyPython Client for Supabase. Query Postgres from Flask, Django, FastAPI. Python user authentication, security policies, edge functions, file storage, and realtime data streaming. Good first issue.Exceptional96fastapi/fastapiFastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for productionExceptional

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.