gsd-build/get-shit-done (opens in a new tab)
Be careful
Be careful. Ask someone technical before installing.
A light-weight and powerful meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven development system for Claude Code by TÂCHES.
What should I do?
Something is missing or slightly off. It may be fine, but ask someone technical before you install it, and never put it on a work computer without your IT team's OK.
Warning signs 0
None found
We didn't find any of the common malware tricks.
Talks to your AI 1
This repo has 1 file that AI coding tools like Claude Code, Cursor and Copilot read as instructions when you open the folder: AGENTS.md. We read them and found nothing that tries to take over your AI. It's still worth opening them yourself before you let an AI work in this folder.
Does it cost money?
We found no mention of paid plans or required accounts. Still check before you rely on it.
Why this grade?
Its checks add up to 80 out of 100, but the score is capped at 69 because the owner archived it, so nobody fixes problems anymore. 55 to 69 is a C. Each area gets its own letter, and the overall grade can be at most one letter better than the weakest safety area ("Is it open about itself?" only costs points). Open a row to see what we checked.
Area grade ADo people trust it?, 26 out of 30 points
Good: Stars. 64,205 people starred it.
Stars are like bookmarks. Malware repos rarely have many real users, and lots of stars means lots of people have looked at it. Stars can be bought, so we also check how fast they came.
Good: Forks. 5,424 copies made by other developers.
A fork is a copy another developer made to build on. Real projects get copied; fake ones rarely do.
Good: Owner history. Organization created 260 days ago.
Scammers use brand-new accounts that get banned and replaced. An owner who has been around for years has more to lose.
Area grade DIs anyone looking after it?, 10 out of 25 points
Poor: Recent updates. The owner archived it. Nobody fixes problems anymore.
Software nobody updates stops getting security fixes.
Good: Track record. Repo is 317 days old.
Older projects have had more time for problems to be spotted and reported.
Good: Releases. Publishes versioned releases.
A release is an official, finished version. Without one, you download whatever is in the code that day.
Area grade AIs it open about itself?, 15 out of 15 points
Good: License. Uses the MIT license.
A license says whether you're allowed to use it. Serious projects almost always have one.
Good: Instructions. Has a README that explains the project.
A README explains what the project does and how to use it. Malware often has a thin or copied one.
Good: Security contact. Tells people how to report security problems.
A security policy tells people how to report problems privately, so they get fixed before attackers use them.
Area grade CDoes it have good security habits?, 3 out of 5 points
So-so: Known security holes. 11 of the 115 parts it uses have a known security hole (for example @hono/node-server@1.19.14, @modelcontextprotocol/sdk@1.29.0). Not every hole affects you, but the owner should update them.
Security holes that are public but not fixed yet are what attackers look for first. From OpenSSF Scorecard, or, when it has no data, from the project's list of parts (its lock file) looked up in OSV, Google's free public database of known security holes.
Area grade AAny malware tricks?, 30 out of 30 points
Good: No warning signs found. We didn't find any of the common malware tricks.
We look for tricks that keep showing up in malware: requests to turn off antivirus, locked zip files, cracks and free premium, hidden code, and AI instruction files that try to take over your assistant. Serious ones cap the grade, however popular the repo is.
Checked Oct 27, 2026. We re-check this repo every night. A grade is a set of warning signs, not a guarantee. How we score