by leocder07 · Agent Tool · ★ 19
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 | 19 |
| Forks | 0 |
| Language | Python |
| Category | Agent Tool |
| License | MIT |
| Quality Score | 62/100 |
| Last Updated | 2026-06-13 |
| Created | 2026-02-14 |
| Platforms | claude-code, python |
| Est. Tokens | ~22k |
8 AI agents grade your entire repository across 6 dimensions — signed, verifiable A+ to F audit reports in minutes
Looking for a spectra alternative? If you're comparing spectra 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.
AI-powered code quality analysis using MCP to help AI assistants review code more effectively. Analyze git cha
AI-powered security assessment SKILLS for your codebase. Multi-language (JS, Go, Python, Rust, Java, PHP, Ruby
Governance-first orchestration for Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI — parallel workers, receipts, quality ga
The deterministic merge gate for AI-generated agent capability changes — a local-first, static Tool-Use Readin
Skills for AI coding agents — Laravel, PHP, React, TypeScript, testing, security, and code quality.
Structured project lifecycle plugin for Claude Code — from idea to production with discipline, parallel agents
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: