Is Instructor safe to use?

Instructor has an HVTrust score of 66.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #211 of 1283 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Instructor?

Instructor scores 66.0/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 13.7k GitHub stars and is categorized under LLM Gateways & Infra.

Instructor

567-labs/instructor

structured outputs for llms

LLM Gateways & Infra Python Grade B Listed MIT

66.0/100

Rank #211 of 1283

Compare Instructor

How does it stack up against its LLM Gateways & Infra 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 A · 4/5 signals

Last push

2026-08-09 · 6d ago

Recent change

Rank +2

Is Instructor safe? Instructor scores 66.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #211 of 1283 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage A (4 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 5.1/10; 62% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in LLM Gateways & Infra

#4 LiteLLM — 77.6 (B) → #5 Ollama — 67.5 (B) → #7 Jan — 64.5 (C) → #8 LLM Gateway — 63.1 (C) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

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

Recent Changes

2026-08-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 18 spots (#194 → #212)

2026-08-10

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 29 spots (#170 → #199)

2026-08-08

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 19 spots (#161 → #180)

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.1/10. 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.

Compare with Bifrost Get email alerts for Instructor View LLM Gateways & Infra Report missing data

81.6

Activity sub-score · out of 100

In LLM Gateways & Infra

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 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 →

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-15

Activity & Reach

Stars

13.7k

Forks

1.2k

Last Push

2026-08-09

6 days ago

Commits (4 wk)

Downloads (7d)

4,194,495

pypi

HN mentions (30d)

Open Issues

Rank Change

▲2

was #213

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs LLM Gateways & Infra

66.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Instructor LLM Gateways & Infra average (13 agents)

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

9.5 / 25

0.7 below avg 10.2

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

1.1 below avg 11.9

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

12.8 / 17

0.7 above avg 12.1

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

17.4 / 20

in line with avg 17.1

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

18.8 / 20

4.9 above avg 13.9

Activity Inputs

81.6 / 100

StarsRepository reach

24.8 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

24.2 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

18.2 / 25

CommunityFork signal

14.3 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

None

No package attestations found

OSSF Scorecard

5.1 / 10

OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 15, 2026

Signed Commits

62%

of last 100 commits verified

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 6

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 6

SAST 0

Security-Policy 0

Signed-Releases -1

Token-Permissions 0

Vulnerabilities 0

Is Instructor safe?

Instructor 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 Instructor publish package provenance?

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

Does Instructor have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Instructor has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.1/10. 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 Instructor actively maintained?

Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 6 day(s).

What license does Instructor use?

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

Are Instructor's commits signed?

62% of the last 100 commits to Instructor 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 Instructor head-to-head

Instructor vs Bifrost → Instructor vs Headroom → Instructor vs vLLM →

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

None detected

No MCP server signal detected.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

high confidence

11 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.

Tool / Plugin Surface

medium confidence

1 tags

Broad capability areas detected.

database

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 Instructor'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.

2026-07-17

Provider Added

Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Cohere, Fireworks AI, Google Gemini, Groq, Mistral AI, Multi-provider (LiteLLM), xAI Grok

Maintain Instructor?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Instructor 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

2026-08-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 18 spots (#194 → #212)

2026-08-10

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 29 spots (#170 → #199)

2026-08-08

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 19 spots (#161 → #180)

2026-08-03

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-08-03

Rank Moved

Rank rose 44 spots (#184 → #140)

2026-08-03

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 3.8pts (62.6 → 66.4)

2026-08-03

Activity Score Changed

Activity score up 8pts (72 → 80)

2026-07-28

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#169 → #181)

2026-07-21

Rank Moved

Rank rose 11 spots (#178 → #167)

2026-07-17

Provider Added

Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Cohere, Fireworks AI, Google Gemini, Groq, Mistral AI, Multi-provider (LiteLLM), xAI Grok

2026-07-17

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 14 spots (#161 → #175)

2026-07-15

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#153 → #163)

2026-07-14

Grade Changed

Trust grade B → C

2026-07-14

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 23 spots (#130 → #153)

2026-07-13

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-06-18

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#102 → #112)

2026-06-16

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-06-14

Grade Changed

Trust grade B → C

2026-06-05

Scorecard Added

OSSF Scorecard: 5.0/10

2026-06-03

Rank Moved

Rank rose 26 spots (#194 → #168)

2026-06-03

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 17.4pts (23.8 → 41.2)

2026-06-02

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #194

GitHub → PyPI: instructor

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

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

Other agents in LLM Gateways & Infra

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 v4.3 · Raw JSON