Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 04:41 UTC

rcsb / foldmatch

Embedding methods for structure similarity search

PythonMIT★ 12 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Feb 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

rcsb/foldmatch holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (35/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

RCSB PDBOrganization
211 followers124 public repossince Apr 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIfoldmatch0.10.0-211 day ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

83Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
19.4/36Commit cadence — 28/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 294 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year294
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year28

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 58 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~15.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count58
latest_release_tagv0.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases15.5
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?

35Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

21At Risk
How it's scored
16.9/60Stars — 12 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars12
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

64Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

19Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.995

Issue & PR responsiveness

83Excellent
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 4/4 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs4
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
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.

Ownership & stewardship

72Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
16.7/25Owner reach — 211 followers of rcsb
25/25Track record — 124 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers211
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginrcsb
public_repos124
account_age_days4,892

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history — 21 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfoldmatch
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

49Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

48Weak
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

38Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

35Weak
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
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 77 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

51Moderate
How it's scored
13.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: lightning 2.6.1 (high 7.8)
5.8/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: transformers 4.48.1 (critical 9.6)
32.3/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 505 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories38
affected_packages2
assessed_packages131
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the pypi:foldmatch@0.10.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 131 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.

39Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

2Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
2.1/40Legible commit history — 4 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.04
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

38Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
6/10Demonstrated agent practice — 3 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.03
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/61 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes48,337
source_files_sampled61
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
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

12GitHub stars
3contributors
294commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
58releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • pypi download statistics for 'foldmatch' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
34Releases

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.

12233312025-042025-082025-12
Major 0Minor 0Patch 34
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10
3.5aggregate

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 04:41 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
0Vulnerabilities77 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIimportlib-metadata==8.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPIesm==3.2.3pyproject.toml
PyPIbiotite==1.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPIlightning==2.6.1pyproject.toml
PyPItyper==0.24.1pyproject.toml
PyPIhf-xet==1.4.2pyproject.toml
PyPIhuggingface-hub==0.36.2pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx==0.28.1pyproject.toml
PyPIfaiss-cpu==1.13.2pyproject.toml
PyPIigraph==1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIleidenalg==0.11.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyarrow==24.0.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 134

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 122 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbiotite1.7.1direct
PyPIesm3.2.3direct
PyPIfaiss-cpu1.13.2direct
PyPIhf-xet1.4.2direct
PyPIhttpx0.28.1direct
PyPIhuggingface-hub0.36.2direct
PyPIigraph1.0.0direct
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.1direct
PyPIleidenalg0.11.0direct
PyPIlightning2.6.1direct
PyPIpyarrow24.0.0direct
PyPItyper0.24.1direct
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.6.1indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.13.3indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIanyio4.12.1indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs25.4.0indirect
PyPIbiopython1.86indirect
PyPIbiotraj1.2.2indirect
PyPIboto31.42.69indirect
PyPIbotocore1.42.69indirect
PyPIbrotli1.2.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.6indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcloudpathlib0.23.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.3indirect
PyPIcuda-bindings12.9.4indirect
PyPIcuda-pathfinder1.4.3indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdna-features-viewer3.1.5indirect
PyPIeinops0.8.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.25.2indirect
PyPIfoldmatch0.8.0indirect
PyPIfonttools4.62.1indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIfsspec2026.2.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipython9.11.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIipywidgets8.1.8indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjmespath1.1.0indirect
PyPIjoblib1.5.3indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-widgets3.0.16indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.5.0indirect
PyPIlightning-utilities0.15.3indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib3.10.8indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImpmath1.3.0indirect
PyPImsgpack1.1.2indirect
PyPImsgpack-numpy0.4.8indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPInetworkx3.6.1indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.3indirect
PyPInvidia-cublas-cu1212.8.4.1indirect
PyPInvidia-cuda-cupti-cu1212.8.90indirect
PyPInvidia-cuda-nvrtc-cu1212.8.93indirect
PyPInvidia-cuda-runtime-cu1212.8.90indirect
PyPInvidia-cudnn-cu129.10.2.21indirect
PyPInvidia-cufft-cu1211.3.3.83indirect
PyPInvidia-cufile-cu121.13.1.3indirect
PyPInvidia-curand-cu1210.3.9.90indirect
PyPInvidia-cusolver-cu1211.7.3.90indirect
PyPInvidia-cusparse-cu1212.5.8.93indirect
PyPInvidia-cusparselt-cu120.7.1indirect
PyPInvidia-nccl-cu122.27.5indirect
PyPInvidia-nvjitlink-cu1212.8.93indirect
PyPInvidia-nvshmem-cu123.4.5indirect
PyPInvidia-nvtx-cu1212.8.90indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpandas3.0.1indirect
PyPIparso0.8.6indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow12.1.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIpropcache0.4.1indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpy3dmol2.5.4indirect
PyPIpydssp0.9.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpygtrie2.5.0indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.2indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpytorch-lightning2.6.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIregex2026.2.28indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIs3transfer0.16.0indirect
PyPIsafetensors0.7.0indirect
PyPIscikit-learn1.8.0indirect
PyPIscipy1.17.1indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIsympy1.14.0indirect
PyPItenacity9.1.4indirect
PyPItexttable1.7.0indirect
PyPIthreadpoolctl3.6.0indirect
PyPItokenizers0.21.4indirect
PyPItorch2.10.0indirect
PyPItorchmetrics1.9.0indirect
PyPItorchtext0.18.0indirect
PyPItorchvision0.25.0indirect
PyPItqdm4.67.3indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItransformers4.48.1indirect
PyPItriton3.6.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItzdata2025.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.6.0indirect
PyPIwidgetsnbextension4.0.15indirect
PyPIyarl1.23.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
PyPIzstd1.5.7.3indirect
Dependency advisories 2

Installing pypi:foldmatch@0.10.0 pulls in 131 packages, direct and transitive: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
transformers4.48.1indirectcritical365.10.0
lightning2.6.1directhigh22022.6.15

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 rcsb/foldmatch. Read them side by side →

100apache/arrowApache Arrow is the universal columnar format and multi-language toolbox for fast data interchange and in-memory analyticsExceptional100scikit-learn/scikit-learnscikit-learn: machine learning in PythonExceptional100deepset-ai/haystackOpen-source AI orchestration framework for building context-engineered, production-ready LLM applications. Design modular pipelines and agent workflows with explicit control over retrieval, routing, memory, and generation. Built for scalable agents, RAG, multimodal applications, semantic search, and conversational systems.Exceptional100aws/serverless-application-modelThe AWS Serverless Application Model (AWS SAM) transform is a AWS CloudFormation macro that transforms SAM templates into CloudFormation templates.Exceptional100envoyproxy/envoyCloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxyExceptional100uxlfoundation/oneDNNoneAPI Deep Neural Network Library (oneDNN)Exceptional

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.