Public record
Software health reportschema 0.32.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-20 04:38 UTC

rekursiv-ai / wesearch

A wascally web research toolkit for agents.

PythonApache-2.0★ 4 stars⑂ 1 forksince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

rekursiv-ai/wesearch holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (76/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (45/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

rekursiv.aiOrganization
18 followers8 public repossince Mar 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIwesearch0.1.1113,509120 days agofetchpapersresearchscrapingsearchweb

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

75Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence5/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume153 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year153
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year5

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases10 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~2.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv0.1.11
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases2.7
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?

50Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars4 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars4
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.1/80Monthly downloads13,509 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageswesearch
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads13,509
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 80% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.805
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
29.8/30PR acceptance131/132 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_prs131
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d31
prs_decided_7d31
prs_merged_30d60
prs_decided_30d60
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
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 domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
9.2/25Owner reach18 followers of rekursiv-ai
7.8/25Track record8 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers18
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginrekursiv-ai
public_repos8
account_age_days156
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history12 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageswesearch
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

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?

70Good · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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 5 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
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file 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_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages101
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 101 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.1/40Legible commit history2 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.02
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingwesearch/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configswesearch/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (wesearch/py.typed)
54.6/55Manageable file sizes1/123 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes72,097
source_files_sampled123
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

4GitHub stars
3contributors
153commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:wesearch@0.1.11; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

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 · 2026-08-20 04:38 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIbeautifulsoup4pyproject.toml
PyPIcurl-cffi>=0.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdefusedxml>=0.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPIhtml2text>=2025.4.15pyproject.toml
PyPImarkdownify>=1.2.3pyproject.toml
PyPItrafilaturapyproject.toml
PyPIzendriver>=0.15.5pyproject.toml
PyPIwraptpyproject.toml
PyPIbrotlipyproject.toml
PyPIzstandardpyproject.toml
All dependencies 101

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 91 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0direct
PyPIbrotli1.2.0direct
PyPIcurl-cffi0.16.0direct
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1direct
PyPIhtml2text2025.4.15direct
PyPImarkdownify1.2.3direct
PyPItrafilatura2.2.0direct
PyPIwrapt2.3.0direct
PyPIzendriver0.16.0direct
PyPIzstandard0.25.0direct
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.2indirect
PyPIasyncio-atexit1.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbasedpyright1.39.10indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcodespell2.4.3indirect
PyPIcourlan1.4.0indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIdateparser1.4.2indirect
PyPIdeprecated1.3.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIemoji2.15.0indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.3indirect
PyPIgrapheme0.6.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhtmldate1.10.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore22.10.0indirect
PyPIhttpx22.10.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipython9.16.1indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIjedi0.20.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIjustext3.0.2indirect
PyPIlxml6.1.1indirect
PyPIlxml-html-clean0.4.5indirect
PyPIlxml-stubs0.5.1indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.2indirect
PyPImcp2.0.0indirect
PyPImcp-types2.0.0indirect
PyPImss10.2.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPInodejs-wheel-binaries24.16.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.44.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIparso0.8.7indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.3indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.53indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.13.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout2.5.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.5.2indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.32indirect
PyPIpytz2026.3.post1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIregex2026.7.19indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruff0.16.3indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.9.2indirect
PyPIsse-starlette3.4.8indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIstarlette1.6.0indirect
PyPItld0.13.2indirect
PyPItraitlets5.16.1indirect
PyPItruststore0.10.4indirect
PyPIty0.0.72indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4indirect
PyPItzlocal5.4.4indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.52.3indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.4indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.8.2indirect
PyPIwebsockets17.0.1indirect
PyPIwesearch0.1.11indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 101 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 v0.32.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.