Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 09:07 UTC

python-jsonschema / jsonschema

An implementation of the JSON Schema specification for Python

PythonMIT★ 4,981 stars⑂ 669 forkssince Dec 2011View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#json-schema#json#validation#schema#jsonschema

python-jsonschema/jsonschema holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (95/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (60/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

94
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Python + JSON SchemaOrganization
71 followers12 public repossince Feb 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0487,086,705109251 days agodata-validationjsonjson-schemajsonschemavalidation
npmjson-schema-test-suitepoints to another repo — not scored0.0.1032134074 days agojsonschematestsuite

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

95Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
31.2/36Commit cadence — 45/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 231 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year231
human_commit_share0.61
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year45

Release discipline

63Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 68 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 251 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~87 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count68
latest_release_tagv4.26.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release251
mean_days_between_releases87

Community & Adoption

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

87Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

93Exceptional
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 4,981 stars
23.5/25Forks — 669 forks
9.8/15Watchers — 58 watchers
Inputs used
forks669
stars4,981
watchers58
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 487,086,705 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesjsonschema
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads487,086,705
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

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

36Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 84% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 35 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.836

Issue & PR responsiveness

65Good
How it's scored
39.8/42Issue resolution — 95% of issues closed
18.9/30PR acceptance — 360/571 decided PRs merged
2/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/13 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs360
open_issues48
closed_issues856
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d15
issue_closed_ratio0.947
closed_unmerged_prs211
first_time_authors_30d10
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d13

Ownership & stewardship

61Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
13.4/25Owner reach — 71 followers of python-jsonschema
17.2/25Track record — 12 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers71
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpython-jsonschema
public_repos12
account_age_days1,666

Package maintenance

91Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 251 days ago
20/20Version history — 109 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesjsonschema
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish251

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

95Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

98Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 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
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 13 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
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://python-jsonschema.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjson-schema, json, validation, schema, jsonschema
has_wikino
homepagehttps://python-jsonschema.readthedocs.io
docs_sitehttps://python-jsonschema.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

86Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

83Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 13 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 3/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate8.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. 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_packages4
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:jsonschema@4.26.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 4 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 49 of 61 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.803
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

79Good
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile, noxfile.py
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 22 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile, noxfile.py
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.22

Code legibility for models

54Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
53.6/55Manageable file sizes — 1/40 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes88,703
source_files_sampled40
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

4,981GitHub stars
98contributors
231commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
68releases
1bus factor
48open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • npm package 'json-schema-test-suite' points at a different repository (https://github.com/atomiqio/json-schema-test-suite); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 669 ⇿
0Stars
669Forks
68Releases

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.

0125250375500625750660142012-012019-052026-09
Major 1Minor 26Patch 30

Each point covers 14 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.4 / 10
8.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-16 09:06 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
9CI-Tests13 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 3/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIattrs>=22.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIjsonschema-specifications>=2023.03.6pyproject.toml
PyPIreferencing>=0.28.4pyproject.toml
PyPIrpds-py>=0.25.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 71

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 66 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIattrs26.1.0direct
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1direct
PyPIreferencing0.37.0direct
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0direct
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3direct
PyPIaccessible-pygments0.0.5indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIarrow1.4.0indirect
PyPIastroid4.1.2indirect
PyPIautomat25.4.16indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.7indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIconstantly23.10.4indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIfqdn1.5.1indirect
PyPIfuro2025.12.19indirect
PyPIhyperlink21.0.0indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIincremental24.11.0indirect
PyPIisoduration20.11.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonpath-ng1.8.0indirect
PyPIjsonpointer3.1.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema—indirect
PyPIlark1.3.1indirect
PyPIlxml6.1.1indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpyenchant3.3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyrsistent0.20.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrfc3339-validator0.1.4indirect
PyPIrfc3986-validator0.1.1indirect
PyPIrfc39871.3.8indirect
PyPIrfc3987-syntax1.1.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals-py4.1.0indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.4indirect
PyPIsphinx8.2.3indirect
PyPIsphinx-autoapi3.8.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-autodoc-typehints3.5.2indirect
PyPIsphinx-basic-ng1.0.0b2indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton0.5.2indirect
PyPIsphinx-json-schema-spec2025.1.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-spelling8.0.2indirect
PyPIsphinxext-opengraph0.13.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItwisted26.4.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.2indirect
PyPIuri-template1.3.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIvirtue2025.7.1indirect
PyPIwebcolors25.10.0indirect
PyPIzope-interface8.5indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:jsonschema@4.26.0 pulls in 4 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with python-jsonschema/jsonschema. Read them side by side →

93bowtie-json-schema/bowtieJSON Schema in every programming languageExceptional95rjsf-team/react-jsonschema-formA React component for building Web forms from JSON Schema.Exceptional94eclipsesource/jsonformsCustomizable JSON Schema-based forms with React, Angular and Vue support out of the box.Exceptional91sourcemeta/jsonschemaThe CLI for working with JSON Schema. Covers formatting, linting, testing, bundling, and more for both local development and CI/CD pipelinesExcellent90fastify/fluent-json-schemaA fluent API to generate JSON schemasExcellent88msgspec/msgspecA fast serialization and validation library, with builtin support for JSON, MessagePack, YAML, and TOMLExcellent

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, npm.