updated 2026-08-12 05:02 UTC

webclaw

0xMassi/webclaw

Fast, local-first web content extraction for LLMs. Scrape, crawl, extract structured data — all from Rust. CLI, REST API

MCP Servers Rust Grade D Listed AGPL-3.0
24.2/100
Rank #855 of 1283
Compare webclaw

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers 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
2026-08-10 · 2d ago
Recent change
New

Is webclaw safe? webclaw scores 24.2/100 (Grade D), ranked #855 of 1283 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; 29% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in MCP Servers

#415 Prometheus MCP — 24.3 (D) → #416 MCP Youtube Transcript — 24.3 (D) → #418 MacOS MCP — 24.2 (D) → #419 Drawio MCP — 24.2 (D) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-08-10
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #858
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 webclaw View MCP Servers Report missing data
78.7
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#417
In MCP Servers

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 2026-08-12 05:02 UTC · Repo last pushed 2 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-12

Activity & Reach

Stars
2.2k
Forks
217
Last Push
2026-08-10
2 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
67
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
0
Rank Change
▲3
was #858

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs MCP Servers

24.2 / 100 · 50.0% confidence

webclaw MCP Servers average (761 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
1.4 / 25
3.6 below avg 5.0
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
2.5 below avg 13.3
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
8.5 / 17
in line with avg 8.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
19.2 / 20
6.8 above avg 12.4
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
8.0 / 20
2.2 above avg 5.8

Activity Inputs

78.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
20.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
22.9 / 25
CommunityFork signal
10.9 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
29%
of last 100 commits verified

Is webclaw safe?

Public trust evidence for webclaw 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 webclaw publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for webclaw. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does webclaw have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for webclaw. 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 webclaw actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).
What license does webclaw use?
webclaw ships under AGPL-3.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are webclaw's commits signed?
28% of the last 100 commits to webclaw 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
Implemented
webclaw appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
2 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
medium 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 webclaw?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores webclaw 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
Listed 1
2026-08-10
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #858
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 24.2 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/webclaw.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/webclaw)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/webclaw"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/webclaw.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

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