Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 10:58 UTC

pallets-eco / flask-debugtoolbar

A toolbar overlay for debugging Flask applications

JavaScript · PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 978 stars⑂ 151 forksgrowth anomalysince Dec 2011View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

pallets-eco/flask-debugtoolbar holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (84/100) and lowest on Vitality (46/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Pallets EcosystemOrganization · verified domain
352 followers38 public repossince May 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIFlask-DebugToolbar0.16.01,255,54231713 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

46Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence — 1/52 weeks with commits
2.7/18Commit volume — 1 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year1
human_commit_share0.82
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year1
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 9 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 713 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~210.5 days
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 1 out of the last 1 releases have a total of 1 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tag0.16.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release713
mean_days_between_releases210.5

Community & Adoption

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

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29.1/60Stars — 978 stars, discounted for inorganic growth: 95 stars over 1 day(s) from 2011-12-16, 95× the repository's own daily baseline
10.9/25Forks — 151 forks, discounted for inorganic growth: 95 stars over 1 day(s) from 2011-12-16, 95× the repository's own daily baseline
7/15Watchers — 19 watchers
Inputs used
forks151
stars978
watchers19
growth_stateanomalous
growth_signalsacquisition_burst, fork_divergence, missing_decay
growth_windows2011-12-16/2011-12-16
growth_peak_days1
growth_factor_pct60
growth_peak_stars95
growth_peak_window2011-12-16
growth_peak_multiple95
growth_top_days_share0.123
growth_baseline_per_day1
growth_history_completeyes
Inorganic Growth Policy discounts the stars and forks components by 40%. The finding describes the timing of public star and fork events; it does not establish that attention was purchased, or that the maintainers were involved.

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 1,255,542 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesFlask-DebugToolbar
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads1,255,542
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?

80Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 31% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 49 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 28 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled49
top_contributor_share0.307
How it's scored
31.9/42Issue resolution — 76% of issues closed
21.8/30PR acceptance — 117/161 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs117
open_issues32
closed_issues101
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.759
closed_unmerged_prs44
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
18.3/25Owner reach — 352 followers of pallets-eco
22.2/25Track record — 38 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers352
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginpallets-eco
public_repos38
account_age_days1,935
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 713 days ago
20/20Version history — 31 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesFlask-DebugToolbar
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish713

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://flask-debugtoolbar.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, flask, flask-debugtoolbar, debug, flask-sqlalchemy, profile, jinja, werkzeug
has_wikino
homepagehttps://flask-debugtoolbar.readthedocs.io
docs_sitehttps://flask-debugtoolbar.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

71Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 28 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
0/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
3/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
7.5/7.5Signed-Releases — 1 out of the last 1 releases have a total of 1 signed artifacts.
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_aggregate6.5
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
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_packages7
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:Flask-DebugToolbar@0.16.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
33.2/40Legible commit history — 51 of 82 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.622
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
11/11Static type checking — src/flask_debugtoolbar/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 15 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/flask_debugtoolbar/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.15
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript with type-check config (src/flask_debugtoolbar/py.typed)
53.1/55Manageable file sizes — 3/87 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes285,314
source_files_sampled87
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — example
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

978GitHub stars
49contributors
1commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
9releases
3bus factor
32open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-06: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 978 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 978 ★ / 151 ⇿
978Stars
151Forks
9Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-06. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

The shaded band marks the burst the Inorganic Growth Policy confirmed. How growth authenticity is assessed

02004006008001,000978149952011-092019-032026-08
Major 0Minor 5Patch 4

Each point covers 14 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 10:57 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 4/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 28 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
10Signed-Releases1 out of the last 1 releases have a total of 1 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIflask>=2.3.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 63

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 61 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIflask—direct
PyPIflask3.0.3direct
PyPIalabaster0.7.13indirect
PyPIbabel2.14.0indirect
PyPIblinker1.8.1indirect
PyPIbuild1.2.2indirect
PyPIcachetools5.3.3indirect
PyPIcertifi2024.7.4indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIchardet5.2.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.3.2indirect
PyPIclick8.1.7indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdistlib0.3.8indirect
PyPIdocutils0.20.1indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.2.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.14.0indirect
PyPIflask-sqlalchemy3.1.1indirect
PyPIgreenlet3.0.3indirect
PyPIidentify2.5.36indirect
PyPIidna3.7indirect
PyPIimagesize1.4.1indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata7.1.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.0.0indirect
PyPIitsdangerous2.2.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.4indirect
PyPImarkupsafe2.1.5indirect
PyPImypy1.11.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.0.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.8.0indirect
PyPIpackaging24.0indirect
PyPIpallets-sphinx-themes2.1.3indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.2.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit3.5.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.18.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-api1.6.1indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.1.0indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.382.post1indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.3indirect
PyPIpytz2024.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.1indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer2.2.0indirect
PyPIsphinx7.1.2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp1.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp1.0.2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-log-cabinet1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp1.0.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml1.1.5indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy2.0.29indirect
PyPItomli2.0.1indirect
PyPItox4.15.1indirect
PyPItypes-docutils0.21.0.20240423indirect
PyPItypes-pygments2.18.0.20240506indirect
PyPItypes-setuptools69.5.0.20240423indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.11.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.2indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.26.1indirect
PyPIwerkzeug3.0.3indirect
PyPIzipp3.19.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:Flask-DebugToolbar@0.16.0 pulls in 7 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.