updated 2026-08-09 20:01 UTC

Supervision

roboflow/supervision

We write your reusable computer vision tools. 💜

Needs review Python Grade D Listed MIT
23.8/100
Rank #822 of 1204
Compare Supervision

How does it stack up against its Needs review 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
2026-08-09 · 0d ago
Recent change
Rank +2

Is Supervision safe? Supervision scores 23.8/100 (Grade D), ranked #822 of 1204 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; recent commits are unsigned; last pushed 2026-08-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Needs review

#7 TencentDB Agent Memory — 56.8 (C) → #8 AI Town — 43.4 (D) → #9 HyperAgent — 43.1 (D) → #10 ClawWork — 36.2 (D) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-08-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 365 spots (#455 → #820)
2026-08-07
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: declared → none
2026-08-07
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Postgres
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 Supervision View Needs review Report missing data
92.2
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#11
In Needs review

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 2026-08-09 20:01 UTC · Repo last pushed today

Activity & Reach

Stars
49.2k
Forks
4.7k
Last Push
2026-08-09
today
Commits (4 wk)
56
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
40
Rank Change
▼2
was #820

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Needs review

23.8 / 100 · 50.0% confidence

Supervision Needs review average (11 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
0 / 25
7.6 below avg 7.6
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
in line with avg 10.8
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
8.5 / 17
3.8 below avg 12.3
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
19.0 / 20
4.3 above avg 14.7
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
11.3 / 20
2.3 above avg 9.0

Activity Inputs

92.2 / 100
StarsRepository reach
28.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
21.9 / 25
CommunityFork signal
17.1 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

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

Is Supervision safe?

Public trust evidence for Supervision 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 Supervision publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Supervision. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Supervision have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for Supervision. 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 Supervision actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Supervision use?
Supervision 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.

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
low confidence
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
None detected
No clear plugin system or broad tool 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 Supervision'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.

2026-08-07
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: declared → none
2026-08-07
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Postgres

Maintain Supervision?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Supervision 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 9Listed 1Surface 1Surface 1
2026-08-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 365 spots (#455 → #820)
2026-08-07
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: declared → none
2026-08-07
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Postgres
2026-07-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#411 → #424)
2026-07-15
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#398 → #411)
2026-07-14
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 34 spots (#364 → #398)
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 40 spots (#324 → #364)
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 30 spots (#284 → #314)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#265 → #284)
2026-06-21
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#246 → #261)
2026-06-20
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 21 spots (#225 → #246)
2026-06-11
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #209
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 23.8 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/supervision.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/supervision)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/supervision"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/supervision.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Needs review

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