Item detail
github.com

statewright/statewright

RepoRadar surfaced statewright/statewright — a agent guardrails — into the Coding Workflows section, where it sits at Gold tier with a 'try now' verdict. Its strongest signal is workflow potential, scored 9.9 out of 10.

Score8.4
Popularity1.0
Riskconditional
TierGold
Score breakdown
Usefulness9.0
Novelty8.0
Momentum7.0
Maturity6.6
Open-source/build8.4
Evidence8.0
Workflow potential9.9
Setup ease6.4

Popularity is tracked separately. Support, ads, sponsorships, and tips never affect these signals.

Why it matters

Useful for developers and teams who want stronger control over when an agent can edit files, run commands, or advance to the next step, without hand-writing a new safety prompt for every task.

Who should use it

Teams trying to keep coding agents inside a stricter bugfix or review workflowDevelopers comparing whether smaller local models improve when the tool surface is narrowed by phaseBuilders who want one guardrail pattern that spans Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and related agent CLIsPeople designing agent runbooks that need explicit state transitions instead of open-ended loops

Who should skip it

Skip statewright/statewright if the source link, documentation, or setup requirements do not align with your current workflow or stack.

About this signal

statewright/statewright is tracked by RepoRadar as a agent guardrails in the Coding Workflows section. It was first seen on 2026-06-28 and last updated on 2026-06-28. The current verdict is 'try now' with a Gold tier and moderate setup difficulty. Across RepoRadar's eight signals, statewright/statewright is strongest on workflow potential (9.9) and practical usefulness (9.0) and weakest on setup ease (6.4) — a profile worth weighing against your own priorities. This page summarizes the evidence RepoRadar has captured from captured source metadata. The score, tier, risk label, and verdict on this page are never influenced by sponsorship, ads, or tips — they reflect only the usefulness, popularity, novelty, momentum, maturity, and evidence signals described in the RepoRadar methodology.

How this item is evaluated

RepoRadar assigned statewright/statewright a composite score of 8.4 out of 10, placing it in the Gold tier. This score combines weighted sub-signals: usefulness (35%), novelty (18%), momentum (14%), maturity (10%), open-source/build quality (7%), evidence quality (6%), workflow potential (6%), and setup ease (4%). Popularity is tracked separately at 1.0 and never affects the composite score or tier. The risk label of 'conditional' reflects inherent user-impacting hazards, not generic novelty. Items with no risk flag may still require normal code review before production use.

Putting this into practice? Read How to vet an AI agent or MCP server before you wire it in for the checklist behind this score.

Risk explanation

The default quickstart opens a hosted signup and API-key flow, so teams should review pricing and control-plane assumptions before org-wide rollout; Once a workflow unlocks edit or shell states, the agent is still executing real local actions inside those allowed bounds.

Evidence links
Closest alternatives / related signals
coding-agentsguardrailsmcpworkflowclaude-codecodexapache-2.0