updated 2026-10-09 08:15 UTC

Open Interpreter

Repository Website

A coding agent for open models like Kimi K3 and GLM 5.3

Coding Agents Rust Listed Apache-2.0

Is Open Interpreter safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 24%
Last push 2d ago
Compare Open Interpreter

How does it stack up against its Coding Agents neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Open Interpreter scores 69.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #367 of 1371 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 5.8/10; 24% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-10-07. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Open Interpreter 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.

Already done? Suggest a correctionAdd the trust badge

Chain of custody

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

  1. Source Partly signed

    github.com/openinterpreter/openinterpreter, Apache-2.0, last pushed 2026-10-07. 24% 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 5.8/10 (scanned Oct 3, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review1
    • Branch Protection3
    • Signed Releases8
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions0
    • Pinned Dependencies9
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 3
    CI-Tests 9
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 1
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 10
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 10
    Packaging -1
    Pinned-Dependencies 9
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases 8
    Token-Permissions 0
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages Not linked

    Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.

Changes to this chain

No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Open Interpreter.

Evidence behind this score

Coverage A: 4 of 5 independent evidence types found.

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

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Open Interpreter’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.

Signed credential (JSON) How to verify

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 Open Interpreter compares in Coding Agents

  1. #19 Goose 69.2 +0.2
  2. #20 prime-agent 69.0 ±0
  3. #21 Open Interpreter 69.0 this agent
  4. #22 Ponytail 68.4 −0.6
  5. #23 Kilo Code 67.2 −1.8

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Open Interpreter’s 69.0.

Where the 69.0 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Coding Agents average

69.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Open Interpreter Coding Agents average (77 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
8.4 / 25
in line with avg 8.8
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
0.9 below avg 11.7
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.4 / 17
1.8 above avg 11.6
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
18.3 / 20
3.9 above avg 14.4
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
16.7 / 20
4.8 above avg 11.9

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 27 spots (#325 → #352)
2026-10-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 13 spots (#335 → #322)
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 211 spots (#130 → #341)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.8/10. 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.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Open Interpreter View Coding Agents Report missing data
91.4
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#21
In Coding Agents

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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-10-09 08:15 UTC · Repo last pushed 2 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-09

Activity & Reach

Stars
68.5k
Forks
5.9k
Last Push
2026-10-07
2 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
41
Downloads (7d)
6,419
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
0
Open Issues
7
Rank Change
▼8
was #359

Analysis

Activity Inputs

91.4 / 100
StarsRepository reach
29.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
20.2 / 25
CommunityFork signal
17.5 / 20

Common questions about Open Interpreter

Open Interpreter 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 Open Interpreter publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Open Interpreter. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Open Interpreter have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Open Interpreter has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.8/10. 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 Open Interpreter actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).
What license does Open Interpreter use?
Open Interpreter ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Open Interpreter's commits signed?
24% of the last 100 commits to Open Interpreter 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
Open Interpreter 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: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
medium confidence
Extensions
Extension based plugin/integration surface detected.
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 Open Interpreter'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.

2026-09-06
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: declared → extension-based

Maintain Open Interpreter?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Open Interpreter 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 12HVTrust 1Surface 1
2026-10-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 27 spots (#325 → #352)
2026-10-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 13 spots (#335 → #322)
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 211 spots (#130 → #341)
2026-09-21
Rank Moved
Rank rose 208 spots (#338 → #130)
2026-09-11
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#324 → #336)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#303 → #318)
2026-09-06
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: declared → extension-based
2026-09-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 30 spots (#273 → #303)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 40 spots (#233 → #273)
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#223 → #233)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 67 spots (#156 → #223)
2026-09-03
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust down 4.0pts (73.6 → 69.6)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 21 spots (#127 → #148)
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#105 → #117)
GitHub → Website → PyPI: open-interpreter

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 69.0 Grade B
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/open-interpreter.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/open-interpreter)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/open-interpreter"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/open-interpreter.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Coding Agents

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 v4.4 · Raw JSON