Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 03:02 UTC

pdoc3 / pdoc

🐍 ➡️ 📜 Auto-generate API documentation for Python projects

Python · MakoAGPL-3.0★ 1,191 stars⑂ 144 forkssince Jan 2019View on GitHub ↗

pdoc3/pdoc holds a health index of 62 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (79/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (22/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

62
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

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

Ownership

pdocOrganization
10 followers2 public repossince Jan 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIpdoc30.11.6276,07836487 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

43Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence2/52 weeks with commits
5.4/18Commit volume3 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year3
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases1 releases published
0/36Release recencylatest release 2,734 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencecadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tag0.3.11
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2,734
mean_days_between_releases
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?

79Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
49.9/60Stars1,191 stars
18/25Forks144 forks
4.7/15Watchers8 watchers
Inputs used
forks144
stars1,191
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (AGPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
72.5/80Monthly downloads276,078 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespdoc3
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads276,078
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 58% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth63 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 24 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled63
top_contributor_share0.577
How it's scored
29.9/42Issue resolution71% of issues closed
21.1/30PR acceptance86/122 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs86
open_issues96
closed_issues237
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.712
closed_unmerged_prs36
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
7.5/25Owner reach10 followers of pdoc3
15.5/25Track record2 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers10
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginpdoc3
public_repos2
account_age_days2,757
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 487 days ago
20/20Version history36 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespdoc3
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish487

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://pdoc3.github.io/pdoc/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics15 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdocumentation, generator, documentation-generator, documentation-tool, documentation-dumper, api-documentation, python, python3, docs, docs-generator, docstrings, docstring, docstring-documentation, pdoc, hacktoberfest
has_wikino
homepagehttps://pdoc3.github.io/pdoc/
docs_sitehttps://pdoc3.github.io/pdoc/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0.5/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
1.2/2.5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 24 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages3
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:pdoc3@0.11.6 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 3 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.

22At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
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.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
52.6/55Manageable file sizes2/46 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes68,628
source_files_sampled46
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

1,191GitHub stars
63contributors
3commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
96open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-07-21 03:02 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2CI-Tests1 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
1Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 24 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 2

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPImakoindirect
PyPImarkdownindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pdoc3@0.11.6 pulls in 3 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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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