Is Graft safe to use?

Graft has an HVTrust score of 67.9/100 (Grade B), ranked #260 of 1320 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Graft?

Graft scores 67.9/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 5.6k GitHub stars and is categorized under Protocols & Tool Integration.

Graft

NanoNets/Graft

Turbocharge Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Gemini & every coding agent: faster, cheaper, with contextual understanding spec

Protocols & Tool Integration TypeScript Grade B Listed MIT

67.9/100

Rank #260 of 1320

Compare Graft

How does it stack up against its Protocols & Tool Integration neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

Open compare tool Suggest correction

Listing state

Listed

Evidence coverage

Grade C · 2/5 signals

Last push

2026-09-04 · 0d ago

Recent change

Rank +3

Is Graft safe? Graft scores 67.9/100 (Grade B), ranked #260 of 1320 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage C (2 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 7.3/10; 86% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-09-04. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Protocols & Tool Integration

#11 Microsoft MCP Catalog — 68.3 (B) → #12 MCP Registry — 67.9 (B) → #14 GitHub MCP Server — 67.7 (B) → #15 Model Context Protocol / MCP — 67.1 (B) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.

Recent Changes

2026-09-04

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#250 → #260)

2026-09-03

Rank Moved

Rank rose 20 spots (#270 → #250)

2026-08-31

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 27 spots (#244 → #271)

Maintainer Checklist

Publish provenance Add package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.

Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Graft View Protocols & Tool Integration Report missing data

85.1

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#13

In Protocols & Tool Integration

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 C is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (2 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Rank Trend

2026-08-26 2026-09-04

Activity & Reach

Stars

5.6k

Forks

509

Last Push

2026-09-04

today

Commits (4 wk)

190

Downloads (7d)

—

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

Rank Change

▼10

was #250

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Protocols & Tool Integration

67.9 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Graft Protocols & Tool Integration average (61 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

13.4 / 25

3.0 above avg 10.4

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

0.8 below avg 11.6

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

14.7 / 17

2.0 above avg 12.7

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

20.0 / 20

5.7 above avg 14.3

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

9.0 / 20

1.0 below avg 10.0

Activity Inputs

85.1 / 100

StarsRepository reach

22.5 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

25.0 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

25 / 25

CommunityFork signal

12.6 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

None

No package attestations found

OSSF Scorecard

7.3 / 10

OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Sep 4, 2026

Signed Commits

86%

of last 100 commits verified

Dependency-Update-Tool 10

Code-Review 8

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Maintained 0

Security-Policy 10

Packaging -1

Token-Permissions 10

Binary-Artifacts 10

Pinned-Dependencies 10

License 10

CII-Best-Practices 0

Vulnerabilities 10

SAST 8

Fuzzing 0

Signed-Releases -1

Branch-Protection 3

CI-Tests 10

Contributors 0

Is Graft safe?

Graft has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.

Does Graft publish package provenance?

No published build provenance is currently detected for Graft. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.

Does Graft have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Graft has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 7.3/10. 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 Graft actively maintained?

Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).

What license does Graft use?

Graft ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Graft's commits signed?

86% of the last 100 commits to Graft 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

Graft appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

high confidence

3 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.

Tool / Plugin Surface

None detected

No clear plugin system or broad tool surface detected.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

Package Provenance Drift

N/A

No package source configured

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live

Maintain Graft?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Graft 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

2026-09-04

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#250 → #260)

2026-09-03

Rank Moved

Rank rose 20 spots (#270 → #250)

2026-08-31

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 27 spots (#244 → #271)

2026-08-29

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#241 → #251)

2026-08-26

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #234

GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

Markdown:
            [![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/graft.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/graft)
            
HTML:
            <a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/graft"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/graft.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Protocols & Tool Integration

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON