heyfood@1.0.7
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "Use hey.food for hello.food dietary questions — restaurant and menu safety evaluation, dish explanation, recommendations, recipes, and dietary profile reads over the hosted MCP surface, plus capability-discovered local Grocery, Menu Watch, and household workflows. Trigger when a user asks an agent to use hey.food, hello.food, their dietary profile, household, food safety, restaurant menus, grocery safety, or recurring menu watches. Never automate the human TUI or bypass hey.food-controlled human approval." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Coverage
Static only; nothing was run yet.The label rests on the code, the instruction files and the publisher. The honeypot run replaces this verdict when it completes.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-09 and scored it 70/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Behavior trace
Queued for honeypot run · static analysis onlyThis version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.
Static findings
No findings across 654 lines in 6 files.
Cost to the agent
Tokens estimated at four characters each. Skills load their instruction text when triggered; the figure is what that costs.
Known vulnerabilities
Vulnerability advisories (OSV) cover npm and PyPI packages; this registry has no advisory database.
What would make this Verified
10 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim heyfood: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.