Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 17:18 UTC

wntrblm / nox

Flexible test automation for Python

PythonApache-2.0★ 1,552 stars⑂ 187 forkssince Feb 2016View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

wntrblm/nox holds a health index of 95 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (68/100). It was last updated 9 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

95
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

95
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 82 is calibrated to 95 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

WinterbloomOrganization
292 followers31 public repossince Mar 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPInox2026.8.175,915,148329 days agoautomationtestingtox

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 9 days ago
20.1/36Commit cadence — 29/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 129 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year129
human_commit_share0.89
days_since_last_push9
active_weeks_last_year29
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 38 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 9 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~61.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count38
latest_release_tag2026.08.17
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release9
mean_days_between_releases61.6
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?

86Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51.8/60Stars — 1,552 stars
18.9/25Forks — 187 forks
6.8/15Watchers — 18 watchers
Inputs used
forks187
stars1,552
watchers18
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
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
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 5,915,148 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesnox
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,915,148
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?

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 34% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.339
How it's scored
36.6/42Issue resolution — 87% of issues closed
27.6/30PR acceptance — 649/705 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 4/4 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 11/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs649
open_issues58
closed_issues392
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d17
prs_decided_30d19
issue_closed_ratio0.871
closed_unmerged_prs56
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d4
first_time_prs_decided_30d4
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
17.7/25Owner reach — 292 followers of wntrblm
21.8/25Track record — 31 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers292
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginwntrblm
public_repos31
account_age_days1,988

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 9 days ago
20/20Version history — 32 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnox
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 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 — 30 out of 30 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://nox.thea.codes
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, testing, automation
has_wikino
homepagehttps://nox.thea.codes
docs_sitehttps://nox.thea.codes
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

76Good · 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 — 30 out of 30 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
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 11/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
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 4 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
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_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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_packages11
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:nox@2026.8.17 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 11 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.

68Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://tox.readthedocs.io/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 89 of 89 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://tox.readthedocs.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile, noxfile.py, tests/resources/noxfile.py, tests/resources/orig_dir/noxfile.py, tests/resources/sym_dir/noxfile.py
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — nox/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 11 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_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile, noxfile.py, tests/resources/noxfile.py, tests/resources/orig_dir/noxfile.py, tests/resources/sym_dir/noxfile.py
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsnox/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.11
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (nox/py.typed)
54.2/55Manageable file sizes — 1/66 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes65,862
source_files_sampled66
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

1,552GitHub stars
99contributors
129commits, last 12 months
9days since last push
38releases
2bus factor
58open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 187 ⇿
0Stars
187Forks
37Releases

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.

0408012016020018642016-032021-062026-08
Major 0Minor 2Patch 35

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.0 / 10
7.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 17:17 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-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 11/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 23 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 4 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
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIargcomplete>=1.9.4,<4pyproject.toml
PyPIattrs>=24.1pyproject.toml
PyPIcolorlog>=6.6,<7pyproject.toml
PyPIdependency-groups>=1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIhumanize>=4pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging>=22pyproject.toml
PyPIplatformdirs>=2pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-discovery>=1pyproject.toml
PyPItomli>=1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIvirtualenv>=20.15pyproject.toml
PyPIvirtualenv>=21pyproject.toml
All dependencies 21

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIargcomplete—direct
PyPIattrs—direct
PyPIcolorlog—direct
PyPIdependency-groups—direct
PyPIhumanize—direct
PyPIpackaging—direct
PyPIplatformdirs—direct
PyPIpython-discovery—direct
PyPItomli—direct
PyPIvirtualenv—direct
PyPIcoverage—indirect
PyPIdocutils—indirect
PyPIhttpx—indirect
PyPIjinja2—indirect
PyPIpbs-installer—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPItox—indirect
PyPIuv—indirect
PyPIzstandard—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:nox@2026.8.17 pulls in 11 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.

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.