Is Docling safe?
Docling scores 86.7/100 (Grade A), ranked #23 of 418 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 4.8/10;
86% of recent commits are signed;
last pushed 2026-07-17. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
Quick Trust Read
Verdict
Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.
86.7/100 · Grade A
Strongest Signal
Identity / Provenance
18.0/18
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
17.8/25
What Would Improve It
Improve safety / integrity to lift the weakest part of the trust profile.
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signalsCurrent OSSF Scorecard is 4.8/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
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 refreshed2026-07-19 08:02 UTC·Repo last pushed 2 days ago
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 4.8/10. 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 2 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?
86% 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.
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.
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Extensions
Extension based plugin/integration surface detected.
browser
code
database
search
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
How this surface has changed
Detected changes to Docling'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 → implemented
Maintain Docling?
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.
