Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-07 12:58 UTC

faststream-community / zMQTT

Pure asyncio MQTT 3.1.1 and 5.0 client library. No paho dependency, no threading, no god classes.

PythonMIT★ 74 stars⑂ 5 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗

faststream-community/zMQTT holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Vitality (77/100) and lowest on Security (42/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

34
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.

34
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

50 followers8 public repossince Nov 2024

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIzmqtt0.1.017,280110 days agomqttmqtt5iotpython-mqttzmqtt

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence — 11/52 weeks with commits
15.6/18Commit volume — 54 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 21 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year54
human_commit_share0.982
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 12 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~15.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv0.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases15.3

Community & Adoption

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

64Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
30.2/60Stars — 74 stars
5/25Forks — 5 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks5
stars74
watchers0
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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
56.5/80Monthly downloads — 17,280 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageszmqtt
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads17,280
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 68% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 7 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.682
How it's scored
35/42Issue resolution — 83% of issues closed
29.2/30PR acceptance — 37/38 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 7/7 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 20/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs37
open_issues1
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d8
prs_decided_7d8
prs_merged_30d15
prs_decided_30d15
issue_closed_ratio0.833
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d7
first_time_prs_decided_30d7
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
12.3/25Owner reach — 50 followers of faststream-community
10.5/25Track record — 8 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers50
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginfaststream-community
public_repos8
account_age_days641

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

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 9 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 24 out of 24 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
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?

42Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 24 out of 24 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
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 20/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 21 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 35 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.7
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier50
security_posture_after_multiplier28
security_posture_before_jurisdiction57
High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

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
advisories66
affected_packages13
assessed_packages106
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 6, moderate 5, low 1
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 106 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.

59Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
38.8/40Legible commit history — 40 of 55 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.727
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — src/zmqtt/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
3.6/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 56 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 56 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configssrc/zmqtt/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.018
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.018
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/zmqtt/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/50 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes32,838
source_files_sampled50
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

74GitHub stars
7contributors
54commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
1open 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:zmqtt@0.1.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 5 ⇿
0Stars
5Forks
10Releases

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.

12345512026-032026-052026-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 5
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-07 12:58 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests24 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 20/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained21 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities35 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItyping_extensions>=4.4pyproject.toml
All dependencies 106

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 105 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0direct
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.12.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbackports-asyncio-runner1.2.0indirect
PyPIbackrefs6.2indirect
PyPIbandit1.9.4indirect
PyPIboltons21.0.0indirect
PyPIbracex2.6indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.5indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIclick-option-group0.5.9indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.4indirect
PyPIcryptography46.0.5indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.2.2indirect
PyPIface26.0.0indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIglom25.12.0indirect
PyPIgoogleapis-common-protos1.73.0indirect
PyPIgriffelib2.0.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIhttpx-sse0.4.3indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.25.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIlibrt0.8.1indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.2indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImcp1.23.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.4indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.2indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.7.5indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImkdocstrings1.0.3indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python2.0.3indirect
PyPImypy1.19.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.37.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-common1.37.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-http1.37.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-instrumentation0.58b0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-instrumentation-requests0.58b0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-instrumentation-threading0.58b0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-proto1.37.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-sdk1.37.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-semantic-conventions0.58b0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-util-http0.58b0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIpeewee3.19.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.9.4indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprotobuf6.33.6indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.12.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.41.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-settings2.13.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.12.1indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.21indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.2indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.3.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.0.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.22indirect
PyPIpywin32311indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml0.19.1indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml-clib0.2.14indirect
PyPIruff0.15.5indirect
PyPIsemantic-version2.10.0indirect
PyPIsemgrep1.156.0indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsse-starlette3.3.3indirect
PyPIstarlette1.0.0indirect
PyPIstevedore5.7.0indirect
PyPItomli2.0.2indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.42.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwcmatch8.5.2indirect
PyPIwrapt1.17.3indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
PyPIzizmor1.23.1indirect
PyPIzmqtt0.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 13

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 106 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 13 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
cryptography46.0.5indirectcritical1150.0.0
click8.1.8indirecthigh18.3.3
mcp1.23.3indirecthigh61.28.1
pyjwt2.12.1indirecthigh92.13.0
python-multipart0.0.22indirecthigh120.0.31
starlette1.0.0indirecthigh101.3.1
urllib32.6.3indirecthigh42.7.0
idna3.11indirectmoderate23.15
pydantic-settings2.13.1indirectmoderate12.14.2
pymdown-extensions10.21indirectmoderate411.0.0
pytest9.0.2indirectmoderate29.0.3
requests2.32.5indirectmoderate22.33.0
pygments2.19.2indirectlow22.20.0

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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