Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 21:26 UTC

ramnes / notion-sdk-py

Notion API client SDK, rewritten in Python! (sync + async)

PythonMIT★ 2,183 stars⑂ 173 forkssince May 2021View on GitHub ↗

ramnes/notion-sdk-py holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (100/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (62/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. 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

Guillaume GelinPersonal account
304 followers97 public repossince Jun 2011@formalco

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 publish
PyPInotion-client3.1.03,880,74123128 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
22.2/36Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 124 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year124
human_commit_share0.57
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year32
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 20 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 128 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~102.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count20
latest_release_tag3.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release128
mean_days_between_releases102.1
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?

82Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
54.2/60Stars — 2,183 stars
18.6/25Forks — 173 forks
7/15Watchers — 19 watchers
Inputs used
forks173
stars2,183
watchers19
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
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_badges9
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 3,880,741 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesnotion-client
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads3,880,741
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?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 68% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 42 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 19 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled42
top_contributor_share0.678
How it's scored
36.8/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
24.6/30PR acceptance — 101/123 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs101
open_issues22
closed_issues157
prs_merged_7d5
prs_decided_7d5
prs_merged_30d8
prs_decided_30d8
issue_closed_ratio0.877
closed_unmerged_prs22
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
17.9/25Owner reach — 304 followers of ramnes
25/25Track record — 97 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers304
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginramnes
public_repos97
account_age_days5,581
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 128 days ago
20/20Version history — 23 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnotion-client
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish128

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

100Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — setup.cfg ([flake8]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://ramnes.github.io/notion-sdk-py
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnotion, notion-api, async, python, httpx, dataclasses, python-client, api-client
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://ramnes.github.io/notion-sdk-py
docs_sitehttps://ramnes.github.io/notion-sdk-py
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

70Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
2.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
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_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.2
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 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_packages7
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:notion-client@3.1.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 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.

62Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://developers.notion.com/llms.txt)
30.9/40Legible commit history — 33 of 57 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://developers.notion.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.579
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — setup.cfg ([flake8]), tox.ini
11/11Static type checking — notion_client/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsnotion_client/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (notion_client/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/40 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes28,022
source_files_sampled40
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
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

2,183GitHub stars
42contributors
124commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
20releases
1bus factor
22open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 173 ⇿
0Stars
173Forks
20Releases

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.

0408012016020017282021-052024-012026-09
Major 3Minor 14Patch 3

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 21:25 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 24

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 24 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIfaker—indirect
PyPIhttpx—indirect
PyPImike—indirect
PyPImkdocs—indirect
PyPImkdocs-coverage—indirect
PyPImkdocs-gen-files—indirect
PyPImkdocs-literate-nav—indirect
PyPImkdocs-material—indirect
PyPImkdocs-section-index—indirect
PyPImkdocstrings—indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python—indirect
PyPInotion-client—indirect
PyPIpre-commit—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-mock—indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout—indirect
PyPIpytest-vcr—indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv—indirect
PyPIsendgrid—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPItox—indirect
PyPIvcrpy6.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:notion-client@3.1.0 pulls in 7 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.