Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 06:40 UTC

mosquito / aio-pika

AMQP 0.9 client designed for asyncio and humans.

PythonApache-2.0★ 1,477 stars⑂ 210 forkssince Sep 2016View on GitHub ↗

mosquito/aio-pika holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Security (42/100). It was last updated 69 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

34
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

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)
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

Dmitry OrlovPersonal account
300 followers225 public repossince May 2011Nebius

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 publishTags
PyPIaio-pika10.0.16,161,78221969 days agorabbitmqasyncioamqpamqp-0.9.1aiormq

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

58Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 69 days ago
6.2/36Commit cadence — 9/52 weeks with commits
15.1/18Commit volume — 47 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_year47
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push69
active_weeks_last_year9
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 24 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 69 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~126 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count24
latest_release_tag10.0.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release69
mean_days_between_releases126
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
51.4/60Stars — 1,477 stars
19.3/25Forks — 210 forks
7.2/15Watchers — 21 watchers
Inputs used
forks210
stars1,477
watchers21
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescoveralls.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 6,161,782 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesaio-pika
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads6,161,782
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?

65Good · 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 — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.744
How it's scored
23.5/42Issue resolution — 56% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 250/286 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 6/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs250
open_issues174
closed_issues221
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.559
closed_unmerged_prs36
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
17.8/25Owner reach — 300 followers of mosquito
25/25Track record — 225 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers300
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginmosquito
public_repos225
account_age_days5,601
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 69 days ago
20/20Version history — 219 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesaio-pika
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish69

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.aio-pika.com/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 15 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrabbitmq, python-3, python-3-6, amqp-connection, amqp, asyncio, async-python, aiormq, python3-7, python3-8, python3-9, python3-10, mypy, typehints, python3-11
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.aio-pika.com/
docs_sitehttps://docs.aio-pika.com/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

42Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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 6/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 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
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.6
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier50
security_posture_after_multiplier28
security_posture_before_jurisdiction56
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages6
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:aio-pika@10.0.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 6 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.

67Good · 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://rasa.com/llms.txt)
19.7/40Legible commit history — 37 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://rasa.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.37
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile, noxfile.py
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — aio_pika/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 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
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile, noxfile.py
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsaio_pika/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (aio_pika/py.typed)
54.2/55Manageable file sizes — 1/73 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes62,863
source_files_sampled73
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

1,477GitHub stars
99contributors
47commits, last 12 months
69days since last push
24releases
1bus factor
174open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 210 ⇿
0Stars
210Forks
24Releases

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.

0408012016020024020842017-012021-112026-09
Major 2Minor 6Patch 16

Each point covers 9 days.

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 · 2026-09-17 06:40 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal 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
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 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 6/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 8 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
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIaiormq>=7,<8pyproject.toml
PyPIyarl—pyproject.toml
All dependencies 99

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 97 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiormq7.0.0direct
PyPIyarl1.24.2direct
PyPIaccessible-pygments0.0.5indirect
PyPIaio-pika10.0.0indirect
PyPIaiomisc18.0.24indirect
PyPIaiomisc-pytest2.0.0indirect
PyPIaiothreads1.1.1indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.1indirect
PyPIargcomplete3.7.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIautodoc—indirect
PyPIautodoc0.5.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcollective-checkdocs0.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcolorlog6.10.1indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.0indirect
PyPIcoveralls4.1.0indirect
PyPIdecorator5.3.1indirect
PyPIdependency-groups1.3.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIfilelock3.29.7indirect
PyPIfuro—indirect
PyPIfuro2025.12.19indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhumanize4.16.0indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlegacy-cgi2.6.4indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPIlogging-journald0.6.11indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy2.2.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser—indirect
PyPImyst-parser5.1.0indirect
PyPInox2026.4.10indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpamqp4.0.1indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.10.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-rst0.2.3indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.4.4indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIruff0.15.20indirect
PyPIsetuptools83.0.0indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIshortuuid1.0.13indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.4indirect
PyPIsphinx9.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinx9.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-autobuild2025.8.25indirect
PyPIsphinx-basic-ng1.0.0b2indirect
PyPIsphinx-design—indirect
PyPIsphinx-design0.7.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-googleanalytics0.5indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIstarlette1.3.1indirect
PyPItimeout-decorator0.5.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyper0.26.8indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.51.0indirect
PyPIuvloop0.21.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.6.0indirect
PyPIwaitress3.0.2indirect
PyPIwatchfiles1.2.0indirect
PyPIwebob1.8.10indirect
PyPIwebsockets16.0indirect
PyPIwebtest3.0.7indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:aio-pika@10.0.1 pulls in 6 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.

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.