Notebooklm Py vs Open Code Review
Open Code Review leads on trust: 94.7/100 (Grade A) against 89.5/100 (Grade A), a 5.2-point gap. Open Code Review leads on supply-chain integrity and adoption.
Unofficial Python API and agentic skill for Google Gemini Notebook. Full programmatic access to NotebookLM's features—including capabilities the web UI doesn't expose—via Python, CLI, and AI agents like Claude Code, Codex, and OpenClaw.
Notebooklm Py doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.
Secure, fast, efficient, battle-tested at Alibaba's scale. Hybrid architecture code review tool: deterministic pipelines + LLM Agent, precise line-level comments, built-in multi-language ruleset (NPE, thread-safety, XSS, SQL injection), OpenAI & Anthropic compatible.
Choose Open Code Review if supply-chain integrity and adoption matter most.
- +3.5Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 60%
- +1.6Adoption: 121.5k weekly downloads against 36.3k
- +1.2Maintenance
- +1.0Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.5 against 6.3
Where they differ
1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Notebooklm Py and Open Code Review, two Agent Skills projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
Full evidence
| Signal | Notebooklm Pyteng-lin/notebooklm-py | Open Code Reviewalibaba/open-code-review |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 89.5 | 94.7 |
| Evidence grade | A | A |
| Coverage grade | B | B |
| Overall rank | #4 | #1 |
| Rank in Agent Skills | #4 | #1 |
| GitHub stars | 19.7k | 46.8k |
| Last updated | today | today |
| Build provenance | Yes | Yes |
| OSSF Scorecard | 6.3 / 10 | 7.5 / 10 |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Downloads | 36k/wk | 121k/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 18.4 | 21.9 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 18.0 | 18.0 |
| Transparency / 17 | 13.9 | 14.9 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 18.8 | 20.0 |
| Adoption / 20 | 16.4 | 18.0 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | Implemented | Implemented |
| External providers | — | 1 — Anthropic |
| Requires API keys | No | No |
| Plugin surface | — | plugins |
| Provenance drift | Match | Match |
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 →