Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-17 04:43 UTC

scitex-ai / scitex-scholar

Scientific paper search, enrichment, download, and management

Python · TeXAGPL-3.0★ 6 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindPluginCommand-line toolMCP serverLibraryhow this is determined

scitex-ai/scitex-scholar holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Security (42/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

75
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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SciTeXOrganization
6 followers78 public repossince May 2025

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIscitex-scholar1.15.035,259370 days agobibtexliteraturemcpmcp-servermetadatapdf-downloadresearchscholarscientific

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 474 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_year474
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year25
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 30 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~10.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count30
latest_release_tagv1.15.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases10.7

Community & Adoption

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

48Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
11.3/60Stars — 6 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars6
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60.6/80Monthly downloads — 35,259 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesscitex-scholar
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads35,259
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?

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.998
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
28/30PR acceptance — 198/212 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs198
open_issues0
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d9
prs_decided_7d9
prs_merged_30d39
prs_decided_30d40
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs14
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
6.1/25Owner reach — 6 followers of scitex-ai
15.9/25Track record — 78 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginscitex-ai
public_repos78
account_age_days523

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 37 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesscitex-scholar
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/ywatanabe1989/scitex-scholar
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 17 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbibtex, claude-code, doi, literature-management, mcp, mcp-server, metadata-enrichment, pdf-download, python, scholar, scitex, scitex-ecosystem, bibliography, literature-search, open-science, openalex, reproducible-research
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://github.com/ywatanabe1989/scitex-scholar
docs_sitehttps://github.com/ywatanabe1989/scitex-scholar
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

42Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/11 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
0/5Packaging — no data
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

49Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
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
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
54.8/55Manageable file sizes — 4/1,234 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes135,577
source_files_sampled1,234
oversized_source_files4
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

6GitHub stars
2contributors
474commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
30releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:scitex-scholar@1.15.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10
4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-17 04:43 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
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 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 0/11 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
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 22
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIclick>=8.0pyproject.toml
PyPImcp—pyproject.toml
PyPIscitex-session>=0.1.5pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib>=3.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscitex-io>=0.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscitex-browser>=0.1.15pyproject.toml
PyPIscitex-logging>=0.2.1pyproject.toml
PyPIplaywright>=1.40.0pyproject.toml
PyPIaiohttp>=3.8.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpymupdf>=1.24.0pyproject.toml
PyPIbeautifulsoup4>=4.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIbibtexparser>=1.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIfeedparser>=6.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx>=0.24.0pyproject.toml
PyPInest-asyncio>=1.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpandas>=1.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>=2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml>=6.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.28.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscitex-dev>=0.30.0pyproject.toml
PyPItenacity>=8.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPItqdm>=4.64.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.