updated 2026-08-19 06:02 UTC

mateclaw

mateaix/mateclaw

🤖 MateClaw — Your second brain with Multi-Agent Orchestration, MCP Protocol, Skills & Memory, Dream, and Multi-Channel S

Multi-Agent Systems Java Grade D Listed Apache-2.0
23.2/100
Rank #924 of 1308
Compare mateclaw

How does it stack up against its Multi-Agent Systems neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

Open compare tool Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
Evidence coverage
Grade D · 1/5 signals
Last push
2026-08-18 · 1d ago
Recent change
Rank +1

Is mateclaw safe? mateclaw scores 23.2/100 (Grade D), ranked #924 of 1308 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage D (1 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; no OSSF Scorecard result yet; 11% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-18. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Multi-Agent Systems

#27 oh-my-agent — 23.5 (D) → #28 Orkas — 23.4 (D) → #30 Rakazo — 22.4 (D) → #31 swarmclaw — 18.1 (D) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 22 spots (#903 → #925)
2026-08-12
Rank Moved
Rank rose 13 spots (#912 → #899)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 53 spots (#861 → #914)
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.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for mateclaw View Multi-Agent Systems Report missing data
79.6
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#29
In Multi-Agent Systems

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 refreshed 2026-08-19 06:02 UTC · Repo last pushed yesterday

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-19

Activity & Reach

Stars
1.0k
Forks
307
Last Push
2026-08-18
yesterday
Commits (4 wk)
138
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
139
Rank Change
▼7
was #917

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Multi-Agent Systems

23.2 / 100 · 50.0% confidence

mateclaw Multi-Agent Systems average (36 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
0.6 / 25
5.5 below avg 6.1
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
in line with avg 11.2
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
8.5 / 17
2.4 below avg 10.9
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
19.9 / 20
6.9 above avg 13.0
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
7.2 / 20
2.7 below avg 9.9

Activity Inputs

79.6 / 100
StarsRepository reach
18.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
11.6 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
11%
of last 100 commits verified

Is mateclaw safe?

Public trust evidence for mateclaw 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 mateclaw publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for mateclaw. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does mateclaw have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for mateclaw. 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 mateclaw actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does mateclaw use?
mateclaw ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are mateclaw's commits signed?
11% of the last 100 commits to mateclaw 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
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
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency detected.
Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration 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 mateclaw?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores mateclaw 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
Rank 4Listed 1
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 22 spots (#903 → #925)
2026-08-12
Rank Moved
Rank rose 13 spots (#912 → #899)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 53 spots (#861 → #914)
2026-08-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 392 spots (#466 → #858)
2026-08-03
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #442
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 23.2 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/mateclaw.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/mateclaw)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mateclaw"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mateclaw.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Multi-Agent Systems

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