Similarly to how test coverage measures how much of a library's source code is hit by its tests, type coverage measures what percentage of a library's typables have type annotations.

Errrr no!

type coverage should be how much of the typing has corresponding tests. This is particularly important for stub packages. Which are focused on confirming the advertised typing accurately reflects actual typing.

Hope they didn't cyber squat the package name.

Listen to Yoda, "Try? Either do or do not! No try there is."

The correct answer to percentage of a libraries typables having type annotations is either zero or all. This is advertised by the py.typed file. There is no middle ground.

Wtf is wrong with pyrefly authors?