Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-22 18:05 UTC

sebastienrousseau / pain001-loader-mt101

Convert legacy SWIFT MT101 Request for Transfer messages into ISO 20022 pain.001 records. Companion to the pain001 suite.

PythonCustom license★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗

sebastienrousseau/pain001-loader-mt101 holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Security (89/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (37/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

81
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Sebastien RousseauPersonal account
165 followers242 public repossince Jan 2012

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 publishTags
PyPIpain001-loader-mt1010.0.742,007140 days agocbprcredit-transferfintechiso20022loadermt101pain001request-for-transferswift

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
14.1/18Commit volume — 36 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_year36
human_commit_share0.895
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 14 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.3 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tagv0.0.74
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases1.3

Community & Adoption

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

37Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 1 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
44/80Monthly downloads — 2,007 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespain001-loader-mt101
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads2,007
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?

54Moderate · 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
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
25.9/30PR acceptance — 25/29 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs25
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16/25Owner reach — 165 followers of sebastienrousseau
25/25Track record — 242 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers165
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginsebastienrousseau
public_repos242
account_age_days5,378
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 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 14 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespain001-loader-mt101
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 11 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 — 19 out of 19 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/sebastienrousseau/pain001-loader-mt101#readme
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://github.com/sebastienrousseau/pain001-loader-mt101#readme
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

89Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

86Excellent
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 — 19 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
1.2/2.5CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: Passing
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — 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
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
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_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate8.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages113
unassessed_packages13
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 113 resolved dependencies against OSV. 13 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.

67Good · 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 — 34 of 34 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 20 of the last 38 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 4 of the last 38 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.526
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.105
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/20 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes26,490
source_files_sampled20
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

1GitHub stars
1contributors
36commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
14releases
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:pain001-loader-mt101@0.0.74; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.6 / 10
8.6aggregate

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 · 2026-10-22 18:05 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-Tests19 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
0Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
9SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpain001>= 0.0.74, < 1pyproject.toml
All dependencies 126

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 124 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIpain001—direct
PyPIpain0010.0.74direct
PyPIaccessible-pygments0.0.5indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.13.1indirect
PyPIatheris3.1.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0indirect
PyPIboolean-py5.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.6.1indirect
PyPIcachecontrol0.14.4indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.10.19indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.2indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomplexipy—indirect
PyPIcomplexipy8.1.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.16.2indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.2indirect
PyPIcyclonedx-python-lib11.12.0indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIdocutils0.23indirect
PyPIelementpath5.1.4indirect
PyPIfilelock4.2.4indirect
PyPIfuro—indirect
PyPIfuro2025.12.19indirect
PyPIhatchling—indirect
PyPIhatchling1.32.4indirect
PyPIhypothesis6.170.5indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.20indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.1indirect
PyPIinterrogate—indirect
PyPIinterrogate1.7.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.1.2indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.6.0indirect
PyPIjeepney0.9.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIkeyring25.7.0indirect
PyPIlibcst1.9.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.16.0indirect
PyPIlicense-expression30.4.4indirect
PyPIlinkify-it-py2.2.0indirect
PyPImando0.7.1indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.4indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImore-itertools11.2.1indirect
PyPImsgpack1.2.3indirect
PyPImutmut3.8.0indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPImypy2.4.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser—indirect
PyPImyst-parser5.1.0indirect
PyPInh30.3.7indirect
PyPIpackageurl-python0.17.6indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpip26.2.2indirect
PyPIpip-api0.0.35indirect
PyPIpip-audit2.10.1indirect
PyPIpip-requirements-parser32.0.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.13.5indirect
PyPIpluggy1.7.0indirect
PyPIpy1.11.0indirect
PyPIpy-cpuinfo210.1.1indirect
PyPIpy-serializable2.1.0indirect
PyPIpycparser3.11indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.3indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.3.3indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-benchmark—indirect
PyPIpytest-benchmark5.3.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpywin32-ctypes0.2.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-ft8.0.0indirect
PyPIradon—indirect
PyPIradon6.0.1indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer46.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.9.1indirect
PyPIruff—indirect
PyPIruff0.17.1indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.5.0indirect
PyPIsetproctitle1.3.8indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve3.0.3indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx9.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinx-basic-ng1.0.0b2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPItabulate0.10.0indirect
PyPItextual8.2.8indirect
PyPItomli2.5.0indirect
PyPItomli-w1.2.0indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.2indirect
PyPItrove-classifiers2026.9.21.13indirect
PyPItwine7.0.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.8.0indirect
PyPIxmlschema4.3.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 113 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 13 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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.