Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-12 22:09 UTC

localstack / moto

Fork of Moto with patches and fixes for LocalStack

PythonApache-2.0★ 27 stars⑂ 38 forkssince Jan 2018forkView on GitHub ↗

KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

localstack/moto holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (98/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (46/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

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.

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

Ownership

LocalStackOrganization

1,903 followers108 public repossince May 2017

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	moto-ext	5.1.45	277,173	340	2 days ago	aws ec2 s3 boto3 mock

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

98Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

96Exceptional

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
32.5/36	Commit cadence — 47/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 614 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	614
human_commit_share	0.11
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	47

Release discipline

100Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 50 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~9.3 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	50
latest_release_tag	5.1.45
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	2
mean_days_between_releases	9.3

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?

46Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

36Weak

How it's scored

23/60	Stars — 27 stars
13.1/25	Forks — 38 forks
0/15	Watchers — 1 watchers

Inputs used

forks	38
stars	27
watchers	1
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

25At Risk

How it's scored

0/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

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

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

91Excellent

How it's scored

72.6/80	Monthly downloads — 277,173 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	moto-ext
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	277,173
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?

71Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

64Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.7/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 30% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 98 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 36 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	98
top_contributor_share	0.301

Issue & PR responsiveness

29At Risk

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
21.1/30	PR acceptance — 173/246 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data

Inputs used

merged_prs	173
open_issues	1
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0
closed_unmerged_prs	73
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, OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

98Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
23.6/25	Owner reach — 1,903 followers of localstack
25/25	Track record — 108 public repos, account ~9 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1,903
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	localstack
public_repos	108
account_age_days	3,375

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 2 days ago
20/20	Version history — 340 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	moto-ext
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

51Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 31 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	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	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

25At Risk

How it's scored

0/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
0/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	no
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	no

Security

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

67Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

59Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
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 — no data
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 36 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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3.5/5	SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 30 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	5.9

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Code-Review, 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
25/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	20
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:moto-ext@5.1.45 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 20 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

0/45	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)

70Good

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile, other_langs/tests_cpp/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — moto/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile
4/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8	Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	—
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile, docs/Makefile, other_langs/tests_cpp/Makefile
has_devcontainer	yes
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	moto/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0.02
toolchain_manifests	other_langs/tests_dotnet/ebs/ElasticBlockStore.csproj, other_langs/tests_dotnet/s3/s3.csproj, other_langs/tests_dotnet/sqs/sqs.csproj, other_langs/tests_go/go.mod, other_langs/tests_java/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

81Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (moto/py.typed)
53.8/55	Manageable file sizes — 56/2,510 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	4,266,904
source_files_sampled	2,510
oversized_source_files	56

Key facts

27GitHub stars

98contributors

614commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

50releases

2bus factor

1open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
Community profile unavailable

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 38 ⇿

0Stars

38Forks

22Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10

5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-12 22:09 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
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
n/a	Code-Review	Found no human activity in the last 30 changesets
10	Contributors	project has 36 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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
7	SAST	SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	30 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 9

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	boto3	`>=1.9.201`	setup.cfg
PyPI	botocore	`>=1.20.88,!=1.35.45,!=1.35.46`	setup.cfg
PyPI	cryptography	`>=35.0.0`	setup.cfg
PyPI	requests	`>=2.5`	setup.cfg
PyPI	xmltodict	`—`	setup.cfg
PyPI	werkzeug	`>=0.5,!=2.2.0,!=2.2.1`	setup.cfg
PyPI	python-dateutil	`<3.0.0,>=2.1`	setup.cfg
PyPI	responses	`>=0.15.0,!= 0.25.5`	setup.cfg
PyPI	Jinja2	`>=2.10.1`	setup.cfg

All dependencies 73

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 73 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2	`v1.41.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/config	`v1.32.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/credentials	`v1.19.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/feature/ec2/imds	`v1.18.17`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/configsources	`v1.4.17`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/endpoints/v2	`v2.7.17`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/ini	`v1.8.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/dynamodb	`v1.54.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/dynamodbstreams	`v1.32.10`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/eks	`v1.77.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/accept-encoding	`v1.13.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/endpoint-discovery	`v1.11.17`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/presigned-url	`v1.13.17`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/signin	`v1.0.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/sso	`v1.30.9`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssooidc	`v1.35.13`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/sts	`v1.41.6`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/smithy-go	`v1.24.0`	indirect
Maven	junit:junit	`4.13.2`	indirect
Maven	org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:apache-client	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:bom	`2.41.19`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:cognitoidentity	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:cognitoidentityprovider	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:dynamodb	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:s3	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:ses	`—`	indirect
Maven	software.amazon.awssdk:url-connection-client	`—`	indirect
npm	@aws-sdk/client-ec2	`^3.749.0`	indirect
npm	@aws-sdk/client-lambda	`^3.749.0`	indirect
npm	@aws-sdk/client-rds	`^3.749.0`	indirect
npm	@aws-sdk/client-s3	`^3.749.0`	indirect
NuGet	AWSSDK.EBS	`3.7.100.153`	indirect
NuGet	AWSSDK.S3	`3.7.103.34`	indirect
NuGet	AWSSDK.SQS	`3.7.200`	indirect
NuGet	FluentAssertions	`6.8.0`	indirect
NuGet	Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.UserSecrets	`7.0.0`	indirect
NuGet	Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk	`17.1.0`	indirect
NuGet	xunit	`2.4.1`	indirect
NuGet	xunit.runner.visualstudio	`2.4.3`	indirect
PyPI	aws-cdk-lib	`2.89.0`	indirect
PyPI	botocore-stubs	`—`	indirect
PyPI	build	`—`	indirect
PyPI	click	`—`	indirect
PyPI	constructs	`—`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`—`	indirect
PyPI	docker	`—`	indirect
PyPI	freezegun	`—`	indirect
PyPI	inflection	`—`	indirect
PyPI	joserfc	`—`	indirect
PyPI	lxml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`—`	indirect
PyPI	openapi-spec-validator	`—`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`—`	indirect
PyPI	prompt-toolkit	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pycognito	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pyotp	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-order	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-xdist	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	readthedocs-sphinx-search	`—`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.14.10`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-rtd-theme	`—`	indirect
PyPI	types-python-dateutil	`—`	indirect
PyPI	types-pyyaml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	types-requests	`—`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`—`	indirect
RubyGems	aws-sdk-sqs	`1.70.0`	indirect
RubyGems	minitest	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:moto-ext@5.1.45 pulls in 20 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.

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 v0.31.0 — 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