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 | 33 |
| Forks | 1 |
| Language | TypeScript |
| Category | AI Tool |
| License | MIT |
| Quality Score | 68/100 |
| Open Issues | 2 |
| Last Updated | 2026-10-19 |
| Created | 2026-09-21 |
| Platforms | cli, node |
| Est. Tokens | ~14k |
Calibrate Jev questions against your own labels: tune criteria on labelled examples, confirm on a held-out set, get a verdict per question. Unofficial.
Looking for a jev-calibrate alternative? If you're comparing jev-calibrate 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.
Open-source alternative to TypeSafe's Jev: a System One style model layer that gives typed, calibrated decisio
🔥🔥 Papers, open reproductions and independent evaluations behind System One models and Jev.
Composable Pi coding agent with MCP, LSP, agent chains, prompt presets, and local eval telemetry
Benchmark, evaluate, and optimize skills to ensure reliable performance across all LLMs
Run workflows, delegate to swarms, and verify outputs before you apply them.
Stops AI coding agents from claiming work is done without evidence. Deterministic hooks decide, TypeSafe's Jev
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: