Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 07:10 UTC

python-trio / asyncclick

Python composable command line utility, trio-compatible version

PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 171 stars⑂ 16 forkssince Jan 2018forkView on GitHub ↗

python-trio/asyncclick holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (76/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (53/100). It was last updated 78 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

python-trioOrganization
148 followers32 public repossince Mar 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIasyncclick8.4.2.11,400,9963078 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 78 days ago
24.2/36Commit cadence35/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume390 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year390
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push78
active_weeks_last_year35
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases39 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 85 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~44.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tag8.4.2
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release85
mean_days_between_releases44.4
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?

53Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
36.2/60Stars171 stars
9.8/25Forks16 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks16
stars171
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads1,400,996 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesasyncclick
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads1,400,996
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?

72Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 32% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth96 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 66 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled96
top_contributor_share0.319
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
14/30PR acceptance7/15 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs7
open_issues0
closed_issues32
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs8
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 backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
15.6/25Owner reach148 followers of python-trio
23.1/25Track record32 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers148
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpython-trio
public_repos32
account_age_days3,477

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 78 days ago
20/20Version history30 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesasyncclick
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish78

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://click.pocoo.org/
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttp://click.pocoo.org/
docs_sitehttp://click.pocoo.org/
has_readmeno
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

59Moderate · 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
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 66 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
0/5Packagingno data
4/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories37
affected_packages10
assessed_packages60
unassessed_packages3
affected_by_severityhigh 4, moderate 5, low 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 60 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.9/40Legible commit history43 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.43
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
11/11Static type checkingsrc/asyncclick/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/asyncclick/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (src/asyncclick/py.typed)
53.3/55Manageable file sizes2/63 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes144,775
source_files_sampled63
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

171GitHub stars
96contributors
390commits, last 12 months
78days since last push
39releases
2bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Community profile unavailable
  • pypi download statistics for 'asyncclick' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced
  • pypi download figures for asyncclick carried forward from the previous scan (stats endpoint unavailable this scan)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 16 ⇿
0Stars
16Forks
33Releases

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.

04812161612018-012021-122025-10
Major 1Minor 4Patch 28

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 07:10 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 66 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIcoloramapyproject.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
PyPIcoloramadirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6direct
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.8.0indirect
PyPIattrs24.3.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.16.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.2.2.post1indirect
PyPIcachetools5.5.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2024.8.30indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIchardet5.2.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.0indirect
PyPIclickindirect
PyPIclick8.1.7indirect
PyPIdistlib0.3.9indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.16.1indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.3indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIimagesize1.4.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.0.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.4indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.2indirect
PyPImypy1.13.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.0.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPIoutcome1.3.0.post0indirect
PyPIpackaging24.2indirect
PyPIpallets-sphinx-themes2.3.0indirect
PyPIpillowindirect
PyPIpip-compile-multi2.7.1indirect
PyPIpip-tools7.4.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.3.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.0.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.18.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-api1.8.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.390indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.4indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.3indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer2.2.0indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPIsphinx8.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinx-issues5.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-notfound-page1.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinx-tabs3.4.7indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-log-cabinet1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPItoposort1.10indirect
PyPItox4.23.2indirect
PyPItrio0.28.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.12.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.3indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.28.0indirect
PyPIwheel0.45.1indirect
Dependency advisories 10

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 60 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 10 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.1.7indirecthigh18.3.3
jinja23.1.4indirecthigh63.1.6
urllib32.2.3indirecthigh122.7.0
wheel0.45.1indirecthigh20.46.2
filelock3.16.1indirectmoderate43.20.3
idna3.10indirectmoderate23.15
pytest8.3.4indirectmoderate29.0.3
requests2.32.3indirectmoderate42.33.0
virtualenv20.28.0indirectmoderate220.36.1
pygments2.18.0indirectlow22.20.0

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 statisticsPyPI.