updated 2026-10-10 20:07 UTC

Planning With Files

Repository Website

Persistent file-based planning for AI coding agents and long-running tasks. Crash-proof markdown plans, session recovery after /clear and compaction, per-turn re-injection against context rot, deterministic completion gate. Manus-style. Install from npm, the Claude Code plugin marketplace, or npx…

Agent Skills Python Listed MIT

Is Planning With Files safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 0%
Last push today
Compare Planning With Files

How does it stack up against its Agent Skills neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Planning With Files scores 60.5/100 (Grade C), ranked #98 of 371 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 5.4/10; recent commits are unsigned; last pushed 2026-10-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Planning With Files 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 Planning With Files 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 and, for skills, AST02 Supply Chain Compromise.

  1. Source Unsigned

    github.com/OthmanAdi/planning-with-files, MIT, last pushed 2026-10-10. None of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so no change traces to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 5.4/10 (scanned Oct 10, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review4
    • Branch Protection0
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions9
    • Pinned Dependencies6
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 0
    CI-Tests 7
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 4
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 0
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 10
    Packaging -1
    Pinned-Dependencies 6
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 9
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages None

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

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-09-01 OSSF Scorecard: 5.0/10

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 Planning With Files’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 the skill’s instructions for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you install it, such as Cisco Skill Scanner.

How Planning With Files compares in Agent Skills

  1. #96 Antigravity For Claude Code 60.8 +0.3
  2. #97 Video Recap Skills 60.8 +0.3
  3. #98 Planning With Files 60.5 this agent
  4. #99 Ctf Skills 60.3 −0.2
  5. #100 I Have Adhd 60.1 −0.4

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Planning With Files’s 60.5.

Where the 60.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Agent Skills average

60.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Planning With Files Agent Skills average (371 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
6.8 / 25
1.0 below avg 7.8
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
0.6 below avg 11.4
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.1 / 17
1.1 above avg 12.0
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
20.0 / 20
5.9 above avg 14.1
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
10.6 / 20
1.6 above avg 9.0

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-09-27
Rank Moved
Rank rose 12 spots (#107 → #95)
2026-09-23
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Anthropic, DeepSeek
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.4/10. 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 Planning With Files View Agent Skills Report missing data
92.2
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#98
In Agent Skills

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade C 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 2026-10-10 20:07 UTC · Repo last pushed today

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-10

Activity & Reach

Stars
27.4k
Forks
2.3k
Last Push
2026-10-10
today
Commits (4 wk)
118
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
4
Rank Change
▲3
was #101

Analysis

Activity Inputs

92.2 / 100
StarsRepository reach
26.6 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
15.6 / 20

Common questions about Planning With Files

Planning With Files 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 Planning With Files publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Planning With Files. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Planning With Files have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Planning With Files has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.4/10. 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 Planning With Files actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Planning With Files use?
Planning With Files ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Planning With Files's commits signed?
0% of the last 100 commits to Planning With Files 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
None detected
No MCP server signal detected.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
2 detected
Public provider/service dependencies 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
How this surface has changed

Detected changes to Planning With Files'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
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Anthropic, DeepSeek
2026-09-18
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: DeepSeek

Maintain Planning With Files?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Planning With Files 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 10Listed 2HVTrust 2Surface 2Grade 1Scorecard 1Delisted 1Surface 1
2026-09-27
Rank Moved
Rank rose 12 spots (#107 → #95)
2026-09-23
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Anthropic, DeepSeek
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 76 spots (#19 → #95)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 7.8pts (52.0 → 59.8)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #19
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-18
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: DeepSeek
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#63 → #74)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#48 → #58)
2026-09-01
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 5.0/10
2026-09-01
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → C
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank rose 197 spots (#253 → #56)
2026-09-01
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 35.4pts (24.6 → 60.0)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#237 → #253)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 32 spots (#205 → #237)
2026-08-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 26 spots (#179 → #205)
2026-08-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 24 spots (#155 → #179)
2026-08-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#136 → #155)
2026-08-26
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #136
GitHub → Website →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 60.5 Grade C
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/planning-with-files.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/planning-with-files)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/planning-with-files"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/planning-with-files.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Agent Skills

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