omniclaw

The first agentic payment network: policy-controlled, gasless, and real money-ready. OmniClaw CLI + Financial Policy Engine let autonomous agents pay and earn safely at machine speed.

Agent Frameworks Python Listed MIT

Is omniclaw safe? Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

OSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 42%
Last push 157d ago
Compare omniclaw
Suggest a correction

In detail: omniclaw scores 39.6/100 (Grade D), ranked #1218 of 1374 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 4.5/10; 42% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-05-29. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How omniclaw could raise its score

Each line changes one public signal and recomputes with the live scoring function. The gains don't add up exactly, because the score is capped near the top.

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships omniclaw and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the code you run. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.

  1. Source Partly signed

    github.com/omnuron/omniclaw, MIT, last pushed 2026-05-29. 42% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 4.5/10 (scanned Oct 25, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review10
    • Branch Protection8
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions0
    • Pinned Dependencies0
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 8
    CI-Tests 10
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 10
    Contributors 3
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 0
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 0
    Packaging -1
    Pinned-Dependencies 0
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 0
    Vulnerabilities 0
  3. Published packages None

    No registry package. omniclaw is used from its repository, so what you run is whatever you check out: pin a release tag or commit.

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-08-31 OSSF Scorecard: 4.5/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage C: 2 of 5 independent evidence types found.

  • GitHub repository data
  • Package downloads (missing)
  • Supply-chain checks
  • Public actions (missing)
  • Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues omniclaw’s score as an Ed25519-signed credential, valid for 7 days. You can check it offline against HVTracker’s published key; if anyone changes a number after signing, verification fails.

What this score doesn’t check

It covers who ships the code, not what the code does. It doesn’t read tool descriptions or prompts for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you connect it, such as Cisco MCP Scanner or Snyk Agent Scan.

How omniclaw compares in Agent Frameworks

  1. #108 OpenFang 43.9 +4.3
  2. #109 PocketFlow 40.8 +1.2
  3. #110 omniclaw 39.6 this agent
  4. #111 Upsonic 38.1 −1.5
  5. #112 AgentLite 36.8 −2.8

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks omniclaw’s 39.6.

Where the 39.6 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Agent Frameworks average

39.6 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

omniclaw Agent Frameworks average (130 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
7.7 / 25
2.3 below avg 10.0
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
0.8 below avg 11.6
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
12.3 / 17
in line with avg 12.5
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
1.5 / 20
13.2 below avg 14.7
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
6.6 / 20
4.7 below avg 11.3

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-15
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1187 → #1197)
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#1152 → #1165)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 4.5/10. 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.
Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
Refresh maintenance signals The repo was last pushed 157 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.
27.3
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#110

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 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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-11-02 12:09 UTC · Repo last pushed 157 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-11-02

Activity & Reach

Stars
570
Forks
42
Last Push
2026-05-29
157 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
17
Rank Change
▼1
was #1217

Analysis

Activity Inputs

27.3 / 100
StarsRepository reach
16.5 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
3.2 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
7.6 / 20

Common questions about omniclaw

Public trust evidence for omniclaw 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 omniclaw publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for omniclaw. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does omniclaw have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
omniclaw has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 4.5/10. 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 omniclaw actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 157 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does omniclaw use?
omniclaw ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are omniclaw's commits signed?
42% of the last 100 commits to omniclaw 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
omniclaw appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
1 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
medium confidence
1 tags
Broad capability areas detected.
  • database
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
How this surface has changed

Detected changes to omniclaw'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.

2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Redis
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-08-27
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days

Maintain omniclaw?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores omniclaw 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

Signal history
Rank 22HVTrust 2Stale 1Scorecard 1Delisted 1Listed 1MCP 1Surface 1
2026-10-15
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1187 → #1197)
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#1152 → #1165)
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Redis
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 433 spots (#682 → #1115)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 11.2pts (31.1 → 42.3)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #682
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-12
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#1092 → #1104)
2026-09-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 18 spots (#1071 → #1089)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 32 spots (#1030 → #1062)
2026-09-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#1014 → #1030)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 46 spots (#968 → #1014)
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 26 spots (#942 → #968)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 59 spots (#883 → #942)
2026-09-02
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 47 spots (#836 → #883)
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 29 spots (#807 → #836)
2026-08-31
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 4.5/10
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank rose 459 spots (#1266 → #807)
2026-08-31
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 26.2pts (17.6 → 43.8)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#1255 → #1266)
2026-08-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#1241 → #1255)
2026-08-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#1228 → #1241)
2026-08-27
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days
2026-08-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#1216 → #1228)
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 38 spots (#1178 → #1216)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 31 spots (#1150 → #1181)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 67 spots (#1078 → #1145)
2026-08-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 575 spots (#502 → #1077)
2026-08-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 32 spots (#456 → #488)

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 39.6 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/omniclaw.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/omniclaw)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/omniclaw"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/omniclaw.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Agent Frameworks

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 v4.4 · Raw JSON