Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 18:31 UTC

willow-memory / willow-mcp

Agent-neutral MCP server with persistent memory (SOIL + Postgres KB) and a sandboxed task queue. Manifest-based ACL; works with any stdio MCP client.

PythonApache-2.0★ 3 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryMCP serverCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined
#agent#authorization#knowledge-base#mcp#mcp-server#postgres#python#task-queue

willow-memory/willow-mcp holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (52/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

84
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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Willow MemoryOrganization
0 followers10 public repossince Jul 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIwillow-mcp2.98.015,2031607 days agoknowledge-basemcpoauthtask-queuewillow

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

77Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
13.2/36Commit cadence — 19/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 2,138 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 30 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year2,138
human_commit_share0.65
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year19

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 7 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv2.98.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release7
mean_days_between_releases1.2
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?

52Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

5Critical
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars3
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

70Good
How it's scored
55.8/80Monthly downloads — 15,203 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageswillow-mcp
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads15,203
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?

56Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

21At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 72% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.718

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good
How it's scored
39/42Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
29.8/30PR acceptance — 662/667 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs662
open_issues4
closed_issues52
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio0.929
closed_unmerged_prs5
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

38Weak
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
0/25Owner reach — 0 followers of willow-memory
8.1/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginwillow-memory
public_repos10
account_age_days98

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 7 days ago
20/20Version history — 160 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageswillow-mcp
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish7

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/rudi193-cmd/willow-2.0
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsagent, authorization, knowledge-base, mcp, mcp-server, postgres, python, task-queue
has_wikino
homepagehttps://github.com/rudi193-cmd/willow-2.0
docs_sitehttps://github.com/rudi193-cmd/willow-2.0
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

68Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

60Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 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 0/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 30 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
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
2/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6
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 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_packages39
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:willow-mcp@2.98.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 39 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.

67Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — docs/AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 62 of 65 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.954
agent_instruction_filesdocs/AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,208

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

61Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 44 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.44
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01

Code legibility for models

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
53.3/55Manageable file sizes — 19/625 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes599,397
source_files_sampled625
oversized_source_files19

Machine-readable interfaces

60Moderate
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

3GitHub stars
2contributors
2,138commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
4open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10
6.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 18:31 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
1Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests3 out of 3 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 0/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 30 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
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPImcp>=2.0.0,<3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpsycopg2-binary>=2.9,<3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIcryptography>=42.0,<51.0pyproject.toml
PyPIstarlette>=1.3.1,<2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIuvicorn>=0.29,<1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIkartikeya>=0.3.2,<1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIjeles>=0.5.1,<1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIforge-play>=0.1.0,<1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwillow-gate>=0.1.0,<1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwillow-ratatosk>=1.13.0,<2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.31,<3.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 44

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcryptography—direct
PyPIcryptography50.0.2direct
PyPIforge-play—direct
PyPIjeles—direct
PyPIkartikeya—direct
PyPImcp—direct
PyPIpsycopg2-binary—direct
PyPIpsycopg2-binary2.9.13direct
PyPIrequests—direct
PyPIstarlette—direct
PyPIuvicorn—direct
PyPIwillow-gate—direct
PyPIwillow-ratatosk—direct
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIfaster-whisper—indirect
PyPIgoogle-api-python-client—indirect
PyPIgoogle-auth—indirect
PyPIhatch-vcs0.5.0indirect
PyPIhatchling1.32.4indirect
PyPIjsonschema—indirect
PyPInestor-meaning—indirect
PyPInumpy—indirect
PyPIopenwakeword—indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpdf2image—indirect
PyPIpdfplumber—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpycparser3.11indirect
PyPIpytesseract—indirect
PyPIpython-docx—indirect
PyPIpyyaml—indirect
PyPIruff0.16.9indirect
PyPIsentry-sdk—indirect
PyPIsetuptools84.0.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools-scm10.3.4indirect
PyPIsilero-vad—indirect
PyPIsounddevice—indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItorch—indirect
PyPItrove-classifiers2026.9.21.13indirect
PyPIvcs-versioning2.6.0indirect
PyPIwillow-reconciler—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:willow-mcp@2.98.0 pulls in 39 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with willow-memory/willow-mcp. Read them side by side →

99ag2ai/ag2AG2 (formerly AutoGen): The Open-Source AgentOS.Join us at: https://discord.gg/sNGSwQME3xExceptional98supabase/supabase-pyPython Client for Supabase. Query Postgres from Flask, Django, FastAPI. Python user authentication, security policies, edge functions, file storage, and realtime data streaming. Good first issue.Exceptional98modelcontextprotocol/python-sdkThe official Python SDK for Model Context Protocol servers and clientsExceptional100deepset-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.Exceptional99IBM/mcp-context-forgeAn AI Gateway, registry, and proxy that sits in front of any MCP, A2A, or REST/gRPC APIs, exposing a unified endpoint with centralized discovery, guardrails and management. Optimizes Agent & Tool calling, and supports plugins.Exceptional99awslabs/cli-agent-orchestratorMulti-agent orchestration for AI coding CLIs — Claude Code, Kiro, Codex, and more, coordinated in isolated tmux sessionsExceptional

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.