updated 2026-10-17 20:06 UTC

Docling

Repository Website by docling-project

Get your documents ready for gen AI

Research & Data Python Listed MIT

Is Docling safe? Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

OSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
Provenance Attested
Signed commits 94%
Last push yesterday
Advisories None known
Compare Docling

How does it stack up against its Research & Data neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Docling scores 89.5/100 (Grade A), ranked #30 of 1378 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage A (4 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: its packages ship with cryptographic provenance; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 5.2/10; 94% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (docling); last pushed 2026-10-16. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Docling 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 Docling 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.

  1. Source Signed

    github.com/docling-project/docling, MIT, last pushed 2026-10-16. 94% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 5.2/10 (scanned Oct 15, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review9
    • Branch Protection4
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow0
    • Token Permissions0
    • Pinned Dependencies6
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 4
    CI-Tests 10
    CII-Best-Practices 10
    Code-Review 9
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow 0
    Dependency-Update-Tool 0
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 10
    Packaging 10
    Pinned-Dependencies 6
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 0
    Vulnerabilities 4

  3. Published packages Partly attested

    • PyPI docling Source link isn't a GitHub repo Build provenance attested

  4. What you install today No known advisories

    Latest release checked: docling 2.139.0. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-17).

Changes to this chain

No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Docling.

Evidence behind this score

Coverage A: 4 of 5 independent evidence types found.

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

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Docling’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 tool descriptions or prompts for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you connect it, such as Cisco MCP Scanner or Snyk Agent Scan.

How Docling compares in Research & Data

  1. #1 Docling 89.5 this agent
  2. #2 Firecrawl 88.4 −1.1
  3. #3 Unstructured 88.0 −1.5
  4. #4 WrenAI 85.1 −4.4
  5. #5 OpenScience 83.3 −6.2

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Docling’s 89.5.

Where the 89.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Research & Data average

89.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Docling Research & Data average (38 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
18.7 / 25
10.4 above avg 8.3
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
18.0 / 18
6.1 above avg 11.9
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
12.9 / 17
1.2 above avg 11.7
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
19.9 / 20
6.5 above avg 13.4
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
19.5 / 20
8.7 above avg 10.8

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Improve safety / integrity to lift the weakest part of the trust profile.
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.2/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
Compare with Firecrawl Get email alerts for Docling View Research & Data Report missing data
96.1
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#1
In Research & Data

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade A reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage A is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (4 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Signals refreshed 2026-10-17 20:06 UTC · Repo last pushed yesterday

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-17

Activity & Reach

Stars
69.0k
Forks
5.1k
Last Push
2026-10-16
yesterday
Commits (4 wk)
254
Downloads (7d)
871,643
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
187
Open Issues
694
Rank Change
=
was #30

Analysis

Activity Inputs

96.1 / 100
StarsRepository reach
29.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
17.2 / 20

Common questions about Docling

Public supply-chain signals for Docling are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but Docling carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does Docling publish package provenance?
Yes. Docling's package releases carry build provenance attestations, which cryptographically link the published package back to its source repository and CI workflow.
Does Docling have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Docling has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.2/10. 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 Docling actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Docling use?
Docling ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Docling's commits signed?
94% of the last 100 commits to Docling 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.

Compare Docling head-to-head

Docling vs Firecrawl → Docling vs Unstructured → Docling vs WrenAI →

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
medium confidence
Implemented
Docling appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
medium confidence
1 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
  • browser
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
low confidence
Unknown
Package source metadata is missing or inconclusive
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
  • MCP signal live
  • External deps live
  • Tool / plugin surface live
  • Package provenance drift live

Maintain Docling?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Docling 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
GitHub → Website → PyPI: docling

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 89.5 Grade A
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/docling.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/docling)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/docling"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/docling.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Research & Data

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