updated 2026-10-11 00:07 UTC

Code Review Graph

Repository Website

Local-first code intelligence graph for MCP and CLI. Builds a persistent map of your codebase so AI coding tools read only what matters, with benchmarked context reductions on reviews and large-repo workflows.

Agent Skills Python Listed MIT

Is Code Review Graph safe? Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

OSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 39%
Last push 5d ago
Advisories None known
Compare Code Review Graph

How does it stack up against its Agent Skills neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Code Review Graph scores 76.1/100 (Grade B), ranked #24 of 371 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 6.5/10; 39% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (code-review-graph); last pushed 2026-10-06. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Code Review Graph could raise its score

Each line changes one public signal and recomputes with the live scoring function. The gains don't add up exactly, because the score is capped near the top.

Already done? Suggest a correctionAdd the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Code Review Graph and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the package you install. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities and, for skills, AST02 Supply Chain Compromise.

  1. Source Partly signed

    github.com/tirth8205/code-review-graph, MIT, last pushed 2026-10-06. 39% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 6.5/10 (scanned Oct 3, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review0
    • Branch Protection3
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions10
    • Pinned Dependencies0
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 3
    CI-Tests 10
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 0
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 10
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 10
    Packaging -1
    Pinned-Dependencies 0
    SAST 10
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 10
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages Linked, not attested

    Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.

  4. What you install today No known advisories

    Latest release checked: code-review-graph 2.3.9. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-11).

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-09-01 OSSF Scorecard: 6.6/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

  • GitHub repository data
  • Package downloads
  • Supply-chain checks
  • Public actions (missing)
  • Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Code Review Graph’s score as an Ed25519-signed credential, valid for 7 days. You can check it offline against HVTracker’s published key; if anyone changes a number after signing, verification fails.

Signed credential (JSON) How to verify

What this score doesn’t check

It covers who ships the code, not what the code does. It doesn’t read the skill’s instructions for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you install it, such as Cisco Skill Scanner.

How Code Review Graph compares in Agent Skills

  1. #22 Gemini Watermark Remover 77.1 +1.0
  2. #23 Claude Mem 76.4 +0.3
  3. #24 Code Review Graph 76.1 this agent
  4. #25 Openmed 74.7 −1.4
  5. #26 Memsearch 74.4 −1.7

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Code Review Graph’s 76.1.

Where the 76.1 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Agent Skills average

76.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Code Review Graph Agent Skills average (371 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
10.1 / 25
2.3 above avg 7.8
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
0.6 below avg 11.4
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
14.0 / 17
1.9 above avg 12.1
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
19.7 / 20
5.6 above avg 14.1
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
17.3 / 20
8.3 above avg 9.0

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-09-24
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Google Gemini, OpenAI
2026-09-23
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → B
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 6.5/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
Publish provenance Add package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Code Review Graph View Agent Skills Report missing data
92.5
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#24
In Agent Skills

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade B 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 refreshed 2026-10-11 00:07 UTC · Repo last pushed 5 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-10

Activity & Reach

Stars
32.0k
Forks
2.9k
Last Push
2026-10-06
5 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
228
Downloads (7d)
68,858
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
101
Rank Change
=
was #24

Analysis

Activity Inputs

92.5 / 100
StarsRepository reach
27.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.3 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
16.1 / 20

Common questions about Code Review Graph

Public supply-chain signals for Code Review Graph are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but Code Review Graph carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does Code Review Graph publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Code Review Graph. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Code Review Graph have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Code Review Graph has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.5/10. The Scorecard checks for branch protection, signed releases, dependency updates, fuzzing, code review, and other supply-chain hygiene items. See the full check breakdown on this page.
Is Code Review Graph actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 5 day(s).
What license does Code Review Graph use?
Code Review Graph ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Code Review Graph's commits signed?
39% of the last 100 commits to Code Review Graph 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.

AI agent surface

MCP, providers, tool surface
Scored in HVTrust

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
high confidence
Implemented
Code Review Graph appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
2 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
medium confidence
1 tags
Broad capability areas detected.
  • browser
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 Code Review Graph'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.

2026-09-24
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Google Gemini, OpenAI

Maintain Code Review Graph?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Code Review Graph 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.

Submit a correction → Add the trust badge

Reputation Timeline

Signal history
Rank 7Listed 2HVTrust 2Grade 2Scorecard 1Delisted 1Surface 1MCP 1
2026-09-24
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Google Gemini, OpenAI
2026-09-23
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → B
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank rose 153 spots (#181 → #28)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 37.5pts (36.6 → 74.1)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #181
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-01
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 6.6/10
2026-09-01
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → B
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank rose 162 spots (#173 → #11)
2026-09-01
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 33.2pts (43.6 → 76.8)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#156 → #173)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 30 spots (#126 → #156)
2026-08-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 30 spots (#96 → #126)
2026-08-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 21 spots (#75 → #96)
2026-08-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#56 → #75)
2026-08-26
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #56
GitHub → Website → PyPI: code-review-graph

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 76.1 Grade B
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/code-review-graph.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/code-review-graph)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/code-review-graph"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/code-review-graph.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Agent Skills

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON