Registry › Compare › Guardrails AI vs Snyk Agent Scan

Guardrails AI vs Snyk Agent Scan

Guardrails AI leads on trust: 76.7/100 (Grade B) against 63.4/100 (Grade C), a 13.3-point gap. Guardrails AI leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance, and rests on broader evidence; Snyk Agent Scan leads on maintenance.

B Guardrails AI 76.7

Adding guardrails to large language models.

guardrails-ai/guardrails · #234 overall · #5 Security & Guardrails · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Guardrails AI if supply-chain integrity and provenance matter most.

+7.9Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 6.0 against 5.7
+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+6.9Adoption: 7.6k GitHub stars against 3.2k
A vs CEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 2

C Snyk Agent Scan 63.4

Security scanner for AI agents, MCP servers and agent skills.

snyk/agent-scan · #574 overall · #8 Security & Guardrails · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Snyk Agent Scan if maintenance matters most.

+6.0Maintenance: last push 1d ago, against 3d ago

Where they differ

20.0

Safety / IntegrityGuardrails AI +7.9

12.1

18.0

Identity / ProvenanceGuardrails AI +7.2

10.8

13.6

TransparencyGuardrails AI +0.3

13.3

11.8

MaintenanceSnyk Agent Scan +6.0

17.8

15.3

AdoptionGuardrails AI +6.9

8.4

-2.0

Runtime calibrationSnyk Agent Scan +3.0

+1.0

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Guardrails AI and Snyk Agent Scan, two Security & Guardrails projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Guardrails AIguardrails-ai/guardrails	Snyk Agent Scansnyk/agent-scan
HVTrust score	76.7	63.4
Evidence grade	B	C
Coverage grade	A	C
Overall rank	#234	#574
Rank in Security & Guardrails	#5	#8
GitHub stars	7.6k	3.2k
Last updated	3d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	No
OSSF Scorecard	6.0 / 10	5.7 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	33k/wk	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	20.0	12.1
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	10.8
Transparency / 17	13.6	13.3
Maintenance / 20	11.8	17.8
Adoption / 20	15.3	8.4
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Implemented
External providers	3 — Anthropic, Multi-provider (LiteLLM), OpenAI	1 — Anthropic
Requires API keys	Yes	Yes
Plugin surface	—	—
Provenance drift	Unknown	—

Open in the live compare tool → Guardrails AI profile Snyk Agent Scan profile More Security & Guardrails →

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption, scaled by an evidence-confidence factor. Grade bands: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Signals refresh daily. Full methodology v4.4 →