custom-format vs atty — Trust Score Comparison

Name: custom-format vs atty Trust Comparison
Creator: Nerq

Side-by-side trust comparison of custom-format and atty. Scores based on security, compliance, maintenance, popularity, and ecosystem signals.

custom-format scores 46.0/100 (F) while atty scores 55.8/100 (C) on the Nerq Trust Score. atty leads by 9.8 points. custom-format is a uncategorized agent with 0 stars. atty is a uncategorized agent with 0 stars.

custom-format

46.0

Categoryuncategorized

Stars0

Sourcecrates

atty

55.8

Categoryuncategorized

Stars0

Sourcecrates

Security60

Maintenance50

Documentation40

Detailed Metric Comparison

Metric	custom-format	atty
Trust Score	46.0/100	55.8/100
Grade	F	C
Stars	0	0
Category	uncategorized	uncategorized
Security	N/A	60
Compliance	N/A	N/A
Maintenance	N/A	50
Documentation	N/A	40
EU AI Act Risk	N/A	N/A
Verified	No	No

Verdict

atty leads with a trust score of 55.8/100 compared to custom-format's 46.0/100 (a 9.8-point difference). Both agents should be evaluated based on your specific requirements.

Detailed Analysis

Security

Security scores measure dependency vulnerabilities, CVE exposure, and security practices. custom-format scores N/A and atty scores 60 on this dimension.

Maintenance & Activity

Activity scores reflect how actively each project is maintained. custom-format: N/A, atty: 50.

Documentation

Documentation quality is evaluated based on README, API docs, and example coverage. custom-format: N/A, atty: 40.

Community & Adoption

custom-format has 0 GitHub stars while atty has 0. Both tools have comparable community sizes, suggesting similar levels of ecosystem support and third-party resources.

When to Choose Each Tool

Choose custom-format if you need:

Consider if it better fits your specific use case

Choose atty if you need:

Higher overall trust score — more reliable for production use
Stronger security profile with fewer known vulnerabilities
More actively maintained with faster release cadence
Better documentation for faster onboarding

Switching from custom-format to atty (or vice versa)

When migrating between custom-format and atty, consider these factors:

API Compatibility: custom-format (uncategorized) and atty (uncategorized) share similar interfaces since they are in the same category.
Security Review: Run a security audit after migration. Check the custom-format safety report and atty safety report for known issues.
Testing: Ensure your test suite covers all integration points before switching in production.
Community Support: custom-format has 0 stars and atty has 0. Larger communities typically mean better Stack Overflow answers and migration guides.

custom-format Safety Report atty Safety Report custom-format Alternatives atty Alternatives

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is safer, custom-format or atty?

Based on Nerq's independent trust assessment, custom-format has a trust score of 46.0/100 (F) while atty scores 55.8/100 (C). The 9.8-point difference suggests atty has a stronger trust profile. Trust scores are based on security, compliance, maintenance, documentation, and community adoption.

How do custom-format and atty compare on security?

custom-format has a security score of N/A/100 and atty scores 60/100. There is a notable difference in their security assessments. custom-format's compliance score is N/A/100 (EU risk: N/A), while atty's is N/A/100 (EU risk: N/A).

Should I use custom-format or atty?

The choice depends on your requirements. custom-format (uncategorized, 0 stars) and atty (uncategorized, 0 stars) serve similar use cases. On trust, custom-format scores 46.0/100 and atty scores 55.8/100. Review the full KYA reports for each agent before making a decision. Consider factors like integration requirements, documentation quality (N/A vs 40), and maintenance activity (N/A vs 50).

Related Comparisons

Last updated: 2026-10-11 | Data refreshed weekly
Disclaimer: Nerq trust scores are automated assessments based on publicly available signals. They are not endorsements or guarantees. Always conduct your own due diligence.