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 D is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (1 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-07-09 20:05 UTC·Repo last pushed 87 days ago
Activity & Reach
Stars
3.4k
Forks
518
Last Push
2026-04-13
87 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
2
Rank Change
NEW
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
15.3 / 100 · 50.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
0.1 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
8.5 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
6.2 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
8.5 / 20
Activity Inputs
46.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
21.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
12.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
12.6 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
2%
of last 100 commits verified
Is II-Agent safe?
Public trust evidence for II-Agent 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 II-Agent publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for II-Agent. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does II-Agent have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for II-Agent. 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 II-Agent actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 87 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does II-Agent use?
II-Agent ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are II-Agent's commits signed?
2% of the last 100 commits to II-Agent 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
high confidence
Implemented
II-Agent 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
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
browser
database
search
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 II-Agent?
HVTrust scores II-Agent 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.
Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license)
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.2 · Raw JSON
