Is Agenta safe?
Agenta scores 43.6/100 (Grade D), ranked #266 of 328 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types).
The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found;
no OSSF Scorecard result yet;
57% of recent commits are signed;
last pushed 2026-07-11. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
Quick Trust Read
Verdict
Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.
43.6/100 · Grade D
Strongest Signal
Maintenance
20.0/20
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
2.8/25
What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 33 spots (#245 → #278)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#226 → #245)
2026-06-22
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#216 → #226)
Maintainer Checklist
Add Scorecard coverageExpose the repository to OpenSSF Scorecard checks so supply-chain posture is easier to verify.
Publish provenanceAdd package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade D reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage B is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (3 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-07-11 04:00 UTC·Repo last pushed today
Rank Trend
2026-07-052026-07-11
Activity & Reach
Stars
4.3k
Forks
565
Last Push
2026-07-11
today
Commits (4 wk)
446
Downloads (7d)
3,701
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
2415
Open Issues
122
Rank Change
=
was #266
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
43.6 / 100 · 75.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
2.8 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
8.5 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
20.0 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
13.5 / 20
Activity Inputs
84.6 / 100
StarsRepository reach
21.8 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
12.8 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
57%
of last 100 commits verified
Is Agenta safe?
Public trust evidence for Agenta is thin: several supply-chain signals are missing or weak. This does not mean the project is unsafe — it means an outside observer cannot easily verify the usual integrity checks. Treat with extra scrutiny.
Does Agenta publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Agenta. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Agenta have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for Agenta. Maintainers can enable the Scorecard GitHub Action to get a public score; without it, automated supply-chain hygiene is harder for outsiders to verify.
Is Agenta actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Agenta use?
Agenta ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Agenta's commits signed?
56% of the last 100 commits to Agenta are verified-signed (GPG, SSH, S/MIME, or GitHub's signing flow). Signed commits help confirm that code was authored by who the commit claims.
Not a safety endorsement. HVTracker describes what public signals show, not whether a project is safe for your use case. Run your own security review before adopting in production.
These runtime-trust fields — detected from public repo docs and manifests — contribute a bounded adjustment to this project's HVTrust score alongside supply-chain evidence. The exact values each field can add or subtract are documented in the methodology → Compare this surface across every listed agent in the capability matrix →
MCP Server Support
medium confidence
Declared
MCP support appears present, but direct server implementation is less certain.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
database
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
high confidence
Match
Published package metadata matches the tracked repo
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live
How this surface has changed
Detected changes to Agenta's runtime surface and supply-chain posture, from daily public-signal snapshots. A change here means our detectors see something different — a genuinely changed capability, or better evidence of an existing one.
Detected MCP server support changed: none → declared
Maintain Agenta?
HVTrust scores Agenta from public signals only — we never contact maintainers first. If a signal is wrong, stale, or missing (provenance you publish, a Scorecard you run, signed releases), tell us and we'll review it. Corrections are public and tracked on GitHub.
