yotta-code-quality@0.4.3
CAUTIONPublisher claims: "Pair-style code quality reviewer: twelve book-grounded decay risks (R1–R6, T1–T6) plus release-safety and first-paint UX checks. Findings always use Iron Law (Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy) and a 0–100 review-index Health Score. Triggers when: user asks to review code/PR/diff, "any issues", "ready to merge", smells, refactoring, tech debt, test quality, coverage, or architecture health; or says 「结对评审」/「发版前扫一眼」/ yotta-code-quality. Do NOT trigger for: greenfield "how do I write X" with no code, pure syntax questions, or tool/framework questions with no shared code." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-10-29 and scored it 64/100 (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
What would make this Verified
16 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim yottameta: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.
- New publisher≈ +3 on the totalTime clears this on its own after 14 and 30 days. Claiming the handle (+50) is the fastest way past it.
- npx invocation of non-well-known package≈ +2 on the totalPin versions and sources; vendor anything fetched at install time.