LlamaIndex

LlamaIndex is the leading document agent and OCR platform

Agent Frameworks Python Grade D Listed MIT
Compare → Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
HVTrust
43.3/100 · Grade D
Evidence coverage
Grade B · 3/5 signals
Last push
2026-07-11 · 0d ago
Recent change
No recent signal change

Is LlamaIndex safe? LlamaIndex scores 43.3/100 (Grade D), ranked #269 of 328 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; no OSSF Scorecard result yet; recent commits are unsigned; last pushed 2026-07-11. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Quick Trust Read

Verdict
Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.
43.3/100 · Grade D
Strongest Signal
Adoption
19.6/20
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
0/25
What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 29 spots (#240 → #269)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#221 → #240)
2026-06-22
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#210 → #221)
Maintainer Checklist
Add Scorecard coverage Expose the repository to OpenSSF Scorecard checks so supply-chain posture is easier to verify.
Publish provenance Add package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
89.5
Activity Score · out of 100
43.3
HVTrust Score · out of 100
#269
Global Rank · of 328
#65

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 B is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (3 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Signals refreshed 2026-07-11 05:00 UTC · Repo last pushed today

Rank Trend

2026-07-05 2026-07-11

Activity & Reach

Stars
50.8k
Forks
7.7k
Last Push
2026-07-11
today
Commits (4 wk)
28
Downloads (7d)
1,798,567
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
2
Open Issues
192
Rank Change
=
was #269

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions

43.3 / 100 · 75.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
0.0 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
8.5 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
17.8 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
19.6 / 20

Activity Inputs

89.5 / 100
StarsRepository reach
28.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
18.2 / 25
CommunityFork signal
18.1 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
Not available
Signed Commits
Unable to query

Is LlamaIndex safe?

Public trust evidence for LlamaIndex 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 LlamaIndex publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for LlamaIndex. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does LlamaIndex have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for LlamaIndex. 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 LlamaIndex actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does LlamaIndex use?
LlamaIndex ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

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.

Ranked neighbours in Agent Frameworks

AI agent 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
Declared
MCP support appears present, but direct server implementation is less certain.
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
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
  • code
  • database
  • search
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
high confidence
Match
Published package metadata matches the tracked repo
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 LlamaIndex'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.

2026-06-05
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-06-05
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Amazon Bedrock, OpenAI, Redis
2026-06-05
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → declared

Maintain LlamaIndex?

HVTrust scores LlamaIndex 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.

Reputation Timeline

Rank 6HVTrust 2Listed 1Score 1MCP 1Surface 1Surface 1
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 29 spots (#240 → #269)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#221 → #240)
2026-06-22
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#210 → #221)
2026-06-21
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#196 → #210)
2026-06-20
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust down 3.6pts (46.0 → 42.4)
2026-06-18
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#169 → #182)
2026-06-05
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-06-05
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Amazon Bedrock, OpenAI, Redis
2026-06-05
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → declared
2026-06-01
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#117 → #134)
2026-05-29
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 7.6pts (35.2 → 42.8)
2026-05-28
Activity Score Changed
Activity score up 22pts (71 → 93)
2026-05-25
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #35

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

HVTrust 43.3 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/llamaindex.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/llamaindex)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/llamaindex"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/llamaindex.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Agent Frameworks

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · Algolia HN Search API
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.2 · Raw JSON