Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-06 02:58 UTC

microsoft / qdk-chemistry

A high-performance toolkit for quantum and classical chemistry calculations.

C++ · PythonMIT★ 67 stars⑂ 27 forkssince Oct 2025View on GitHub ↗

microsoft/qdk-chemistry holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (63/100). It was last updated today. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

93
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

93
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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MicrosoftOrganization
126,993 followers8,245 public repossince Dec 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIqdk-chemistry2.1.0-70 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
25.6/36Commit cadence — 37/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 258 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 21 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year258
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year37
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 5 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 21 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~43.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count5
latest_release_tagv2.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release21
mean_days_between_releases43.1

Community & Adoption

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

63Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29.5/60Stars — 67 stars
11.8/25Forks — 27 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks27
stars67
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
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
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

84Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 20% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 23 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 15 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled23
top_contributor_share0.197
How it's scored
35.4/42Issue resolution — 84% of issues closed
23.8/30PR acceptance — 280/353 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs280
open_issues36
closed_issues194
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d8
prs_merged_30d23
prs_decided_30d30
issue_closed_ratio0.843
closed_unmerged_prs73
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 126,993 followers of microsoft
25/25Track record — 8,245 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers126,993
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginmicrosoft
public_repos8,245
account_age_days4,621

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 — 7 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesqdk-chemistry
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://microsoft.github.io/qdk-chemistry/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsquantum-chemistry, quantum-computing
has_wikino
homepagehttps://microsoft.github.io/qdk-chemistry/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

65Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-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
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 21 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): packaging. 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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages25
unassessed_packages17
affected_by_severitynone
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 25 resolved dependencies against OSV. 17 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 95 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.95
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — ruff.toml
11/11Static type checking — python/src/qdk_chemistry/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 42 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configspython/src/qdk_chemistry/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.42
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
54/55Manageable file sizes — 15/793 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes134,698
source_files_sampled793
oversized_source_files15
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples, notebooks, sample
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks, sample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files

Key facts

67GitHub stars
23contributors
258commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
5releases
4bus factor
36open 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:qdk-chemistry@2.1.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 27 ⇿
0Stars
27Forks
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.

0510152025302772026-012026-042026-07
Major 2Minor 1Patch 2
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-06 02:57 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-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
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 21 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPInumpy>=2.0.0,<2.4.0python/pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy>=1.7.0python/pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib>=3.10.0python/pyproject.toml
PyPIruamel-yaml>=0.18.10python/pyproject.toml
PyPIqdk>=1.30.0python/pyproject.toml
PyPIpybind11-stubgen>=2.5.1python/pyproject.toml
PyPIh5py>=3.0.0python/pyproject.toml
All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 34 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIh5pydirect
PyPImatplotlibdirect
PyPInumpydirect
PyPInumpy2.3.5direct
PyPIpybind11-stubgendirect
PyPIqdkdirect
PyPIruamel-yamldirect
PyPIscipydirect
PyPIaltgraph0.17.5indirect
PyPIauditwheel6.6.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdelocate0.13.0indirect
PyPIfonttools4.62.1indirect
PyPIgeometricindirect
PyPIgoogleapis-common-protos1.75.0indirect
PyPIgrpcio1.80.0indirect
PyPIipykernelindirect
PyPImacholib1.16.4indirect
PyPInetworkxindirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.42.1indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-common1.42.1indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-grpc1.42.1indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-proto1.42.1indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-sdk1.42.1indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-semantic-conventions0.63b1indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpandasindirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIprotobuf5.29.6indirect
PyPIpybind11indirect
PyPIpybind113.0.4indirect
PyPIpyelftools0.32indirect
PyPIpylatexenc2.10indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpyscfindirect
PyPIqiskitindirect
PyPIqiskit-ibm-runtimeindirect
PyPIrequestsindirect
PyPIscikit-build-coreindirect
PyPIscikit-build-core0.12.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 25 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 17 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.