Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-28 00:04 UTC

klaasnicolaas / python-odp-amsterdam

🗃️ Asynchronous Python client for the open datasets of Amsterdam (🇳🇱 - Netherlands)

PythonMIT★ 4 stars⑂ 1 forksince Nov 2020View on GitHub ↗

#python #api #amsterdam #garage #occupancy #hacktoberfest #nipkaart #opendata

klaasnicolaas/python-odp-amsterdam holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (55/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Klaas SchoutePersonal account

326 followers74 public repossince Jul 2016@MrGreenBoutiqueOffices

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	odp-amsterdam	7.0.2	40,279	16	0 days ago	garages amsterdam car occupancy async client

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
36/36	Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 263 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	263
human_commit_share	0.08
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	52

Release discipline

84Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 33 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~125.9 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	33
latest_release_tag	v7.0.2
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	0
mean_days_between_releases	125.9

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?

55Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

8Critical

How it's scored

7.7/60	Stars — 4 stars
0/25	Forks — 1 forks
0/15	Watchers — 1 watchers

Inputs used

forks	1
stars	4
watchers	1
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

92Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	yes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

77Good

How it's scored

61.4/80	Monthly downloads — 40,279 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	odp-amsterdam
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	40,279
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

22At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5	Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	2
top_contributor_share	0.991

Issue & PR responsiveness

74Good

How it's scored

35/42	Issue resolution — 83% of issues closed
29.4/30	PR acceptance — 1,270/1,294 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	1,270
open_issues	1
closed_issues	5
prs_merged_7d	2
prs_decided_7d	2
prs_merged_30d	8
prs_decided_30d	8
issue_closed_ratio	0.833
closed_unmerged_prs	24
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

66Good

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.1/25	Owner reach — 326 followers of klaasnicolaas
25/25	Track record — 74 public repos, account ~10 yr old

Inputs used

followers	326
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	klaasnicolaas
public_repos	74
account_age_days	3,728

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20	Version history — 16 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	odp-amsterdam
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 10 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), ruff.toml
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

75Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://api.data.amsterdam.nl
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 8 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	python, api, amsterdam, garage, occupancy, hacktoberfest, nipkaart, opendata
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://api.data.amsterdam.nl
docs_site	https://api.data.amsterdam.nl
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

83Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

79Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5	SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	7.9

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	16
affected_packages	2
assessed_packages	42
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 1, low 1
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 42 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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40	Legible commit history — no data

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
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.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

72Good

How it's scored

0/18	One-command bootstrap
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), ruff.toml
11/11	Static type checking — src/odp_amsterdam/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — devcontainer, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 92 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	yes
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	src/odp_amsterdam/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.92

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/odp_amsterdam/py.typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/14 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	10,366
source_files_sampled	14
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
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

4GitHub stars

2contributors

263commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

33releases

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:odp-amsterdam@7.0.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.9 / 10

7.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-28 00:04 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
3	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10	Contributors	project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
10	Pinned-Dependencies	all dependencies are pinned
10	SAST	SAST tool is run on all commits
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 2

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	aiohttp	`>=3.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	yarl	`>=1.6.0`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 39 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	aiohttp	`3.14.3`	direct
PyPI	yarl	`1.24.5`	direct
PyPI	yarl	`1.25.1`	direct
PyPI	aiohappyeyeballs	`2.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	aiosignal	`1.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	aresponses	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	attrs	`26.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	codespell	`2.4.3`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	covdefaults	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.16.1`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.16.2`	indirect
PyPI	frozenlist	`1.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.19`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.20`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	multidict	`6.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	multidict	`6.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	odp-amsterdam	`0.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`26.3`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pip	`22.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	poetry	`1.1.13`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit-hooks	`6.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	prek	`0.5.3`	indirect
PyPI	propcache	`0.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	propcache	`0.5.4`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.21.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-asyncio	`1.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`7.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	ruamel-yaml	`0.19.1`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.16.7`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.16.9`	indirect
PyPI	syrupy	`6.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	ty	`0.0.80`	indirect
PyPI	ty	`0.0.84`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	yamllint	`1.38.0`	indirect
PyPI	zizmor	`1.30.1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 42 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
pip	`22.1.2`	indirect	high	14	`26.2.0`
poetry	`1.1.13`	indirect	low	2	`2.3.4`

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.

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.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records