Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-10 12:26 UTC

ices-tools-dev / echoSMs

Making acoustic scattering models available to fisheries and plankton scientists via the world wide web

Python · MATLABMIT★ 22 stars⑂ 6 forkssince May 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#acoustics#backscatter#fisheries#models#plankton#scattering

ices-tools-dev/echoSMs holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (42/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ICES tools (development area)Organization
28 followers93 public repossince Jul 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIechosms0.26.04787635 days agoacousticbackscattermodel

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

96Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

94Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
30.5/36Commit cadence — 44/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 455 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year455
human_commit_share0.86
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year44

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 68 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 35 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~8.8 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count68
latest_release_tagv0.26.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release35
mean_days_between_releases8.8

Community & Adoption

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

42Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

32At Risk
How it's scored
21.4/60Stars — 22 stars
5.8/25Forks — 6 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars22
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

45Weak
How it's scored
35.7/80Monthly downloads — 478 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesechosms
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads478
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

19Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.976

Issue & PR responsiveness

60Moderate
How it's scored
24/42Issue resolution — 57% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance — 33/35 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs33
open_issues9
closed_issues12
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.571
closed_unmerged_prs2
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

66Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
10.5/25Owner reach — 28 followers of ices-tools-dev
25/25Track record — 93 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers28
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginices-tools-dev
public_repos93
account_age_days3,705

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 35 days ago
20/20Version history — 76 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesechosms
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish35

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 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.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 5 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://ices-tools-dev.github.io/echoSMs/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsacoustics, backscatter, fisheries, models, plankton, scattering
has_wikino
homepagehttps://ices-tools-dev.github.io/echoSMs/
docs_sitehttps://ices-tools-dev.github.io/echoSMs/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

66Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

58Moderate
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
2/2.5CI-Tests — 5 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/24 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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
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_aggregate5.8

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_packages40
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:echosms@0.26.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 40 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.

48Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — 0 of 86 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

60Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 10 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.1

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/110 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes57,453
source_files_sampled110
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
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 — notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsnotebooks
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

22GitHub stars
5contributors
455commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
68releases
1bus factor
9open 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 ★ / 6 ⇿
0Stars
6Forks
45Releases

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.

123456622024-092025-052026-01
Major 0Minor 14Patch 31

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-10 12:25 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
8CI-Tests5 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/24 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
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 19
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPInumpy>=2.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy>=1.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpandas>=2.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIxarray>=2024.10.0pyproject.toml
PyPItrimesh>=4.4.4pyproject.toml
PyPIpymeshlab>=2023.12.post2pyproject.toml
PyPIshapely>=2.0.6pyproject.toml
PyPImapbox_earcut>=1.0.2pyproject.toml
PyPIspheroidalwavefunctions>=0.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPItqdm>=4.66.5pyproject.toml
PyPImapply>=0.1.27pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.32.4pyproject.toml
PyPIrtoml>=0.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIurllib3>=1.26.20pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib>=3.10.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.8.0pyproject.toml
PyPIjsonschema-rs>=0.18.1pyproject.toml
PyPIorjson>=3.10.7pyproject.toml
PyPImanifold3d>=3.0.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 118

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 19 direct and 99 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIjsonschema-rs0.50.0direct
PyPImanifold3d3.5.2direct
PyPImapbox-earcut2.0.0direct
PyPImapply0.2.0direct
PyPImatplotlib3.11.1direct
PyPInumpy2.5.2direct
PyPIorjson3.12.0direct
PyPIpandas3.0.5direct
PyPIpymeshlab2025.7.post1direct
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPIrich15.0.0direct
PyPIrtoml0.13.0direct
PyPIscipy1.18.1direct
PyPIshapely2.1.2direct
PyPIspheroidalwavefunctions0.1.6direct
PyPItqdm4.70.0direct
PyPItrimesh5.0.0direct
PyPIurllib32.7.0direct
PyPIxarray2026.7.0direct
PyPIappnope1.0.0indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.2indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcloudpickle3.1.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.3indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.4indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdataclasses-json0.6.7indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.21indirect
PyPIdeepmerge3.0indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.3indirect
PyPIfonttools4.63.0indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgriffelib2.2.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipykernel6.31.0indirect
PyPIipython9.16.1indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIjedi0.20.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjson-schema-for-humans1.5.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.9.1indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.5.0indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.3indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkdown22.5.5indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImarshmallow3.26.2indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.2indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs—indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.4indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.2indirect
PyPImkdocs-material—indirect
PyPImkdocstrings1.0.6indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python2.0.7indirect
PyPImultiprocess0.70.19indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInest-asyncio1.6.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIparso0.8.7indirect
PyPIpathos0.3.5indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow12.3.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.3indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpox0.3.7indirect
PyPIppft1.7.8indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.53indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions11.0.1indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.5.2indirect
PyPIpytz2026.3.post1indirect
PyPIpyxdg0.28indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.2.0indirect
PyPIruff0.16.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIspyder-kernels3.1.5indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItornado6.5.8indirect
PyPItraitlets5.16.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspect0.9.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.4indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.8.2indirect
PyPIwurlitzer3.1.1indirect
PyPIzensical0.0.57indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:echosms@0.26.0 pulls in 40 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 ices-tools-dev/echoSMs. Read them side by side →

60Summersweet-Software/ComprehensiveConfigModerate93typegoose/typegooseTypegoose - Define Mongoose models using TypeScript classes.Exceptional84hugalafutro/model-hotelMulti-Provider AI Gateway - No personal logs by design. Model autodiscovery, Failover groups, High availability, Android companion app, and more - "Because we have LiteLLM at home"Excellent100astropy/astropyAstronomy and astrophysics core libraryExceptional99huggingface/huggingface_hubThe official CLI and Python client for the Hugging Face Hub.Exceptional99django/djangoThe Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.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.