Last updated: · Indexed by AgentSkillsHub · Auto-synced every 8h
Flagged: sudo usage. 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 | 41 |
| Forks | 1 |
| Language | Lua |
| Category | AI Tool |
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Quality Score | 66/100 |
| Open Issues | 2 |
| Last Updated | 2026-10-20 |
| Created | 2026-09-21 |
| Est. Tokens | ~23k |
Typed-judgment admission control at the traffic edge: three-layer prompt-injection and abuse filter for nginx/OpenResty, powered by TypeSafe Jev. Fail-open, cached, hot-reloadable.
Looking for a jev-edge alternative? If you're comparing jev-edge with other ai tool tools, these 6 projects are the closest alternatives on Agent Skills Hub — ranked by topic overlap, star count, and community traction.
TypeSafe Jev as a decision layer for the Pi coding agent: a measured tool-call gate plus jev_ask for typed, ca
Auto mode for every coding agent, built on Jev: risk-scores every tool call with session context (deny / ask /
A calibrated context sieve for Claude Code: every tool result is judged by a System One model before it enters
Put a live Jev (TypeSafe) meter on any video: every sentence scored, rendered as a 16:9 edit
Ask your house a question, get a number back. Home Assistant integration for TypeSafe Jev: typed answers as se
Curated, security-first OpenClaw skills (Markdown-based). Security audit skills - detect prompt injection, sup
Explore other popular ai 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: