Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-10 19:07 UTC

jpbede / aiotankerkoenig

Async Python 3 client for tankerkoenig.de

PythonMIT★ 4 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Jan 2024View on GitHub ↗

jpbede/aiotankerkoenig holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (40/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
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.

73
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).

Ownership

Jan-Philipp BeneckePersonal account
64 followers106 public repossince Mar 2013@cleverreach

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIaiotankerkoenig0.5.531,433140 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence — 30/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 166 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year166
human_commit_share0.09
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year30
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 15 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~109 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 4 out of the last 4 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count15
latest_release_tagv0.5.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases109

Community & Adoption

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

40Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars — 4 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars4
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60/80Monthly downloads — 31,433 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesaiotankerkoenig
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads31,433
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
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 86% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.863
How it's scored
31.5/42Issue resolution — 75% of issues closed
29/30PR acceptance — 831/859 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs831
open_issues1
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.75
closed_unmerged_prs28
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
13/25Owner reach — 64 followers of jpbede
25/25Track record — 106 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers64
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginjpbede
public_repos106
account_age_days4,944
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 — 14 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesaiotankerkoenig
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 10 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint]), ruff.toml
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, python3, tankerkoenig, tankerkoenig-api, python-client, python-library
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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 3/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
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
1.5/7.5Maintained — 3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 4 out of the last 4 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 49 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5
How it's scored
20.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: aiohttp 3.14.1 (moderate 5.3)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories96
affected_packages7
assessed_packages88
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 3, moderate 2
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 88 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint]), ruff.toml
11/11Static type checking — aiotankerkoenig/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 91 of the last 100 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
lockfilespackage-lock.json, uv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsaiotankerkoenig/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.91
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (aiotankerkoenig/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/8 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes8,654
source_files_sampled8
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

4GitHub stars
4contributors
166commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
15releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:aiotankerkoenig@0.5.5; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
5Releases

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.

12233312024-022025-022026-03
Major 0Minor 2Patch 3

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-10 19:06 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 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 3/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
8Signed-Releases4 out of the last 4 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities49 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIaiohttp>=3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIyarl>=1.6.0pyproject.toml
PyPImashumaro>=3.11,<4pyproject.toml
PyPIorjson>=3.9.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 88

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 84 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohttp3.14.1direct
PyPImashumaro3.22direct
PyPIorjson3.11.9direct
PyPIyarl1.24.2direct
npmprettier3.8.4indirect
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.6.2indirect
PyPIaiointercept0.1.12indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIaiotankerkoenig0.0.0indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.13.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.5.0indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.4indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIauthlib1.7.2indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.5.20indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.7indirect
PyPIclick8.4.1indirect
PyPIcodespell2.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcovdefaults2.3.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.5indirect
PyPIcryptography48.0.0indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.1indirect
PyPIdparse0.6.4indirect
PyPIfilelock3.29.1indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort8.0.1indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjoblib1.5.3indirect
PyPIjoserfc1.7.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.11.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImarshmallow4.3.0indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy2.0.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInltk3.9.4indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.10.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit-hooks6.0.0indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.5indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.3.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.4.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIregex2026.5.9indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml0.19.1indirect
PyPIruff0.15.12indirect
PyPIsafety3.7.0indirect
PyPIsafety-schemas0.0.16indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsyrupy5.1.0indirect
PyPItenacity9.1.4indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.0indirect
PyPItqdm4.68.1indirect
PyPItyper0.26.7indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.4.2indirect
PyPIyamllint1.38.0indirect
Dependency advisories 7

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 88 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 7 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
anyio4.13.0indirectcritical44.14.2
nltk3.9.4indirectcritical643.10.3
cryptography48.0.0indirecthigh750.0.0
urllib32.7.0indirecthigh62.8.0
virtualenv21.4.2indirecthigh821.7.13
aiohttp3.14.1directmoderate63.14.3
multidict6.7.1indirectmoderate16.9.1

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.