Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-10 03:48 UTC

pavelsimo / fascat

Fascat is a Python library and CLI for converting CAD data into realtime-ready assets.

PythonMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 0 forkssince May 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

pavelsimo/fascat holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (85/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (30/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Pavel SimóPersonal account
25 followers71 public repossince Jun 2013

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
PyPIfascat0.6.0387660 days agobrepcadclifbxgltfigesopenusdstepusd

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 519 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year519
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year7

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 6 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 60 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~9.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count6
latest_release_tagv0.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release60
mean_days_between_releases9.2

Community & Adoption

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

30At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars3
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
34.5/80Monthly downloads — 387 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfascat
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads387
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 82/82 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs82
open_issues0
closed_issues4
prs_merged_7d16
prs_decided_7d16
prs_merged_30d16
prs_decided_30d16
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
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
10.2/25Owner reach — 25 followers of pavelsimo
25/25Track record — 71 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers25
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginpavelsimo
public_repos71
account_age_days4,831
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 60 days ago
20/20Version history — 6 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfascat
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish60

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])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://pavelsimo.github.io/fascat
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://pavelsimo.github.io/fascat
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

40Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
25/25Dependency lockfiles — uv.lock
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfilesuv.lock
manifestspyproject.toml
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno

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_packages26
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:fascat@0.6.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 26 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.

85Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://pavelsimo.github.io/fascat/llms.txt)
30.4/40Legible commit history — 57 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://pavelsimo.github.io/fascat/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.57
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,557
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — fascat/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsfascat/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (fascat/py.typed)
51.3/55Manageable file sizes — 12/179 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes177,423
source_files_sampled179
oversized_source_files12

Key facts

3GitHub stars
1contributors
519commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
6releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code 0; Skipping github.com/pavelsimo/fascat: run: RepoClient.LocalPath: error during tarballHandler.setup: internal error: handler.httpClient.Do: Get "https://codeload.github.com/pavelsimo/fascat/legacy.tar.gz/refs/heads/main": internal error: innerTransport.RoundTrip: internal error: innerTransport.RoundTrip: error in HTTP: dial tcp: lookup codeload.github.com on 127.0.0.11:53: server misbehaving); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIcadquery-ocp>=7.7pyproject.toml
PyPIfast-simplification>=0.1pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy>=1.24pyproject.toml
PyPIpillow>=10.0pyproject.toml
PyPItrimesh>=4.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyper>=0.15pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-extensions>=4.8pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.0pyproject.toml
PyPItomli>=2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIusd-core>=24.8pyproject.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:fascat@0.6.0 pulls in 26 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.