Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 07:32 UTC

langchain-ai / langchain-litellm

🦜🔗 LangChain interface to LiteLLM

PythonMIT★ 55 stars⑂ 39 forkssince Apr 2025View on GitHub ↗

langchain-ai/langchain-litellm holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (68/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

92
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.

92
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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

LangChainOrganization
22,397 followers261 public repossince Mar 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIlangchain-litellm0.7.21,225,782270 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

91Excellent · 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 — 180 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year180
human_commit_share0.63
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year30

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 26 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~22.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count26
latest_release_taglangchain-litellm==0.7.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases22.1
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?

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
28.1/60Stars — 55 stars
13.2/25Forks — 39 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks39
stars55
watchers2
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_badges9
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 1,225,782 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageslangchain-litellm
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads1,225,782
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?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 74% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 22 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled22
top_contributor_share0.741
How it's scored
32.7/42Issue resolution — 78% of issues closed
25.3/30PR acceptance — 169/200 decided PRs merged
9/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 9/13 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs169
open_issues14
closed_issues49
prs_merged_7d12
prs_decided_7d16
prs_merged_30d13
prs_decided_30d17
issue_closed_ratio0.778
closed_unmerged_prs31
first_time_authors_30d9
first_time_prs_merged_30d9
first_time_prs_decided_30d13
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 22,397 followers of langchain-ai
20.1/25Track record — 261 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers22,397
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginlangchain-ai
public_repos261
account_age_days1,295

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 — 27 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslangchain-litellm
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-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_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/integrations/providers/litellm
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslangchain, litellm
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/integrations/providers/litellm
docs_sitehttps://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/integrations/providers/litellm
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

84Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

80Excellent
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
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/14 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 — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
4.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
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
advisories3
affected_packages2
assessed_packages174
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1, 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 174 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.

77Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.langchain.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 57 of 63 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.langchain.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.905
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — langchain_litellm/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 32 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configslangchain_litellm/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.32
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (langchain_litellm/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/29 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes45,409
source_files_sampled29
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

55GitHub stars
22contributors
180commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
26releases
1bus factor
14open 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:langchain-litellm@0.7.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 39 ⇿
0Stars
39Forks
23Releases

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.

0102030403932025-042026-012026-09
Major 0Minor 5Patch 12

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.0 / 10
8.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 07:31 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
6Code-ReviewFound 9/14 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
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIlangchain-core>=1.6.1,<2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlitellm>=1.83.14,<2.0.0,!=1.82.7,!=1.82.8pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx>=0.28.1,<0.29.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 174

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 171 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIhttpx0.28.1direct
PyPIlangchain-core1.6.1direct
PyPIlitellm1.101.0direct
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.6.1indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.12.1indirect
PyPIappnope0.1.4indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.1indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs25.4.0indirect
PyPIbackports-asyncio-runner1.2.0indirect
PyPIblockbuster1.5.27indirect
PyPIboto31.43.95indirect
PyPIbotocore1.43.95indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.1.4indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.4indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIcodespell2.4.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.4indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.1indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.20indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdistro1.9.0indirect
PyPIduckdb1.4.4indirect
PyPIduckdb-engine0.17.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfastuuid0.14.0indirect
PyPIfilelock3.24.3indirect
PyPIforbiddenfruit0.1.4indirect
PyPIfreezegun1.5.5indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIfsspec2026.2.0indirect
PyPIgreenlet3.3.1indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhf-xet1.2.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhuggingface-hub1.4.1indirect
PyPIidna3.15indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.5.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipykernel7.3.0indirect
PyPIipython8.38.0indirect
PyPIipython9.10.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjiter0.13.0indirect
PyPIjmespath1.1.0indirect
PyPIjsonpatch1.33indirect
PyPIjsonpointer3.0.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.23.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.9.1indirect
PyPIlangchain1.3.10indirect
PyPIlangchain-litellm0.7.2indirect
PyPIlangchain-protocol0.0.19indirect
PyPIlangchain-tests1.1.7indirect
PyPIlangchain-text-splitters1.1.2indirect
PyPIlanggraph1.2.6indirect
PyPIlanggraph-checkpoint4.1.1indirect
PyPIlanggraph-prebuilt1.1.0indirect
PyPIlanggraph-sdk0.4.2indirect
PyPIlangsmith0.8.18indirect
PyPIlark1.3.1indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImypy-protobuf5.1.0indirect
PyPInest-asyncio21.7.2indirect
PyPInumpy2.2.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.2indirect
PyPIopenai2.24.0indirect
PyPIorjson3.11.7indirect
PyPIormsgpack1.12.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpandas2.3.3indirect
PyPIparso0.8.6indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.9.2indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIpropcache0.4.1indirect
PyPIprotobuf6.33.5indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpy-cpuinfo9.0.0indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.12.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.41.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-settings2.15.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-benchmark5.0.1indirect
PyPIpytest-codspeed4.3.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-dotenv0.5.2indirect
PyPIpytest-mock3.15.1indirect
PyPIpytest-recording0.13.4indirect
PyPIpytest-socket0.8.1indirect
PyPIpytest-watcher0.6.3indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.3indirect
PyPIpytz2025.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.1.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIregex2026.2.19indirect
PyPIrequests2.33.0indirect
PyPIrequests-mock1.12.1indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIresponses0.26.3indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIruff0.16.7indirect
PyPIs3transfer0.19.2indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy2.0.46indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIsyrupy5.5.3indirect
PyPItenacity9.1.4indirect
PyPItiktoken0.12.0indirect
PyPItokenizers0.22.2indirect
PyPItoml0.10.2indirect
PyPItomli2.4.0indirect
PyPItornado6.5.8indirect
PyPItqdm4.67.3indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItyper0.23.1indirect
PyPItyper-slim0.23.1indirect
PyPItypes-cffi1.17.0.20250915indirect
PyPItypes-chardet5.0.4.6indirect
PyPItypes-protobuf6.32.1.20251210indirect
PyPItypes-pyopenssl24.1.0.20240722indirect
PyPItypes-pytz2026.3.1.20260727indirect
PyPItypes-pyyaml6.0.12.20260906indirect
PyPItypes-redis4.6.0.20241004indirect
PyPItypes-requests2.33.0.20260906indirect
PyPItypes-setuptools82.0.0.20260210indirect
PyPItypes-toml0.10.8.20260518indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPItzdata2025.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuuid-utils0.14.0indirect
PyPIvcrpy8.2.1indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.6.0indirect
PyPIwebsockets15.0.1indirect
PyPIwrapt2.1.1indirect
PyPIxxhash3.6.0indirect
PyPIyarl1.22.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
PyPIzstandard0.25.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 174 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.1.8indirecthigh18.3.3
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

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.