# propeller-heads/tycho — health index 71/100 (Good)

> Inspection of the public repository propeller-heads/tycho by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/propeller-heads/tycho
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/propeller-heads/tycho
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/propeller-heads/tycho/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/p/propeller-heads/tycho.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-17
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.11.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 96/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 53/100 | Moderate |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 77/100 | Good |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 81/100 | Good |
| Security | 16% | 37/100 | At risk |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 82/100 | Good |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Low latency indexer service for blockchain data. |
| Homepage | https://www.propellerheads.xyz/tycho |
| Primary language | Rust |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 174 |
| Forks | 58 |
| Created | 2023-08-11 |
| Last push | 2026-07-16 |
| Latest release | 0.337.0 |
| Commits (last year) | 5,039 |
| Bus factor | 4 |
| Topics | blockchain, indexing |

## Vitality — 96/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | met | 36 / 36 | 52/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 5039 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 100 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 0 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~0.7 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | maintenance record not established from the collected data |

## Community & Adoption — 53/100 (Moderate)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 55/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 36.3 / 60 | 174 stars |
| Forks | partial | 14.6 / 25 | 58 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 3.9 / 15 | 6 watchers |

### Community health — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

## Sustainability & Governance — 77/100 (Good)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 86/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 43.2 / 54 | 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 19.3 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 14% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 43 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 14 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 78/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 33.4 / 46.8 | 71% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 35.1 / 38.2 | 1040/1134 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 9 / 15 | Found 8/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 65/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 13.8 / 25 | 81 followers of propeller-heads |
| Track record | partial | 21.5 / 25 | 33 public repos, account ~5 yr old |

## Engineering Quality — 81/100 (Good)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 68/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 13 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | not met | 0 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://www.propellerheads.xyz/tycho |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 2 topics |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 37/100 (At risk)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 37/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 3.8 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 4.5 / 7.5 | Found 8/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 14 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | not met | 0 / 10 | dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | not met | 0 / 7.5 | no update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 3 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 153 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 82/100 (Good)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 75/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-client/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-common/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-ethereum/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-execution/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-indexer/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-integration-test/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-simulation/CLAUDE.md, crates/tycho-storage/CLAUDE.md, protocols/CLAUDE.md, protocols/adapter-integration/CLAUDE.md, protocols/substreams/CLAUDE.md, protocols/testing/CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 82/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | met | 18 / 18 | protocols/substreams/base-aerodrome-slipstreams/Makefile, protocols/substreams/crates/substreams-helper/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-liquidityparty/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-pancakeswap-v3/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-sfrax/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-sfraxeth/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v2/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v3-logs-only/Makefile, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v3/Makefile, protocols/substreams/unichain-velodrome/Makefile |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | Rust (statically typed) |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | excluded | 0 / 8 | no data |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 6 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |

### Code legibility for models — 95/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Rust (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 50.1 / 55 | 87/986 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 80/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | docs/.gitbook/assets/openapi.json, proto/sf/codegen/conversation/v1/conversation.proto, proto/sf/firehose/v2/firehose.proto, proto/sf/substreams/index/v1/keys.proto, proto/sf/substreams/internal/v2/deltas.proto, proto/sf/substreams/internal/v2/service.proto, proto/sf/substreams/options.proto, proto/sf/substreams/rpc/v2/service.proto, proto/sf/substreams/sink/service/v1/service.proto, proto/sf/substreams/v1/clock.proto, proto/sf/substreams/v1/deltas.proto, proto/sf/substreams/v1/modules.proto, proto/sf/substreams/v1/package.proto, proto/tycho/evm/v1/common.proto, proto/tycho/evm/v1/entity.proto, proto/tycho/evm/v1/utils.proto, proto/tycho/evm/v1/vm.proto, protocols/substreams/base-aerodrome-slipstreams/proto/v1/slipstreams.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-ambient/proto/ambient.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-cowamm/proto/cowamm.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-curve/proto/factory.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-curve/proto/pool.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-ekubo-v2/proto/ekubo.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-ekubo-v3/proto/ekubo.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-fermiswap/proto/v1/fermiswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-maverick-v2/proto/v1/maverick.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-pancakeswap-v3/proto/v1/pancakeswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-sfrax/proto/contract.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-sfraxeth/proto/contract.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v2/proto/v1/uniswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v3-logs-only/proto/v1/uniswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v3/proto/v1/uniswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v4/proto/uniswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v4/shared/proto/uniswap.proto, protocols/substreams/ethereum-uniswap-v4/with-hooks/proto/angstrom.proto, protocols/substreams/unichain-velodrome/proto/v1/slipstreams.proto |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | examples |

## Collection warnings

- Resolved dependency list truncated to 2000 of 2312 packages (counts remain complete)

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt