by WiktorB2004 · Agent Tool · ★ 8
Last updated: · Indexed by AgentSkillsHub · Auto-synced every 8h
None of the 42 rules matched — no credential harvesting, no data exfiltration, no curl-pipe-shell installer. Scanned against 42 published rules built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy, refreshed every 8 hours. Full audit →
The quality score combines nine heuristic checks of the repo and its README: completeness, clarity, specificity, examples, structure, agent readiness, step-by-step content, instruction quality and security notes. It rates how well the project explains itself to an agent, not the code.
| Stars | 8 |
| Forks | 2 |
| Language | Python |
| Category | Agent Tool |
| License | MIT |
| Quality Score | 70/100 |
| Open Issues | 2 |
| Last Updated | 2026-10-20 |
| Created | 2026-09-18 |
| Platforms | python |
| Est. Tokens | ~15k |
LlamaIndex reranker + router powered by TypeSafe Jev - typed scores/choices, cheaper than LLM-as-judge.
Looking for a llama-index-jev alternative? If you're comparing llama-index-jev with other agent tool tools, these 6 projects are the closest alternatives on Agent Skills Hub — ranked by topic overlap, star count, and community traction.
PDF extraction that audits its own output — and certifies any other extractor's, catching pages they silently
Ask your house a question, get a number back. Home Assistant integration for TypeSafe Jev: typed answers as se
🔥🔥 Papers, open reproductions and independent evaluations behind System One models and Jev.
Airgapped closed-corpus QA loop: a self-hosted Qwen3.6 agent explores a .zip dataroom under a token budget wit
Stops AI coding agents from claiming work is done without evidence. Deterministic hooks decide, TypeSafe's Jev
大型語言模型(LLM)的讀書會內容code部分整理，此github提供簡單、免費、易實作code範例，並由淺入深帶你一步步了解如何基於python建置LLM流程、部屬功能等
Explore other popular agent tool tools:
Grades come from a rule-based scan built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy: 42 published rules, covering credential harvesting, data exfiltration, curl | sh installers and more. It is a first-layer scan, not a manual audit — we say so rather than overstate it.
The scale of the problem is documented independently: Liu et al. (2026), in a study of 31,132 agent skills, report that 26.1% contain security vulnerabilities. Our own full-catalog census is published as a citable open dataset.
Sources & who's responsible: