Is Planning With Files Safe? — Trust Score: 81.5/100
According to Nerq's independent analysis of planning-with-files, this productivity has a trust score of 81.5 out of 100, earning a A grade. With 13,805 stars on github, it is recommended for production use. Security score: 1/100. Compliance: 96/100 across 52 jurisdictions. EU AI Act classification: minimal. Data sourced from 13+ independent signals including GitHub, NVD, OSV.dev, and OpenSSF Scorecard. Last updated: 2026-03-19. Machine-readable data (JSON).
Is Planning With Files safe?
YES — Planning With Files has a Nerq Trust Score of 81.5/100 (A). It meets Nerq's trust threshold with strong signals across security, maintenance, and community adoption. Recommended for production use — review the full report below for specific considerations.
Trust Assessment
Trusted — planning-with-files demonstrates strong trust signals. It meets the threshold for Nerq Verified status, indicating solid security practices, active maintenance, and a healthy ecosystem presence.
Trust Signal Breakdown
Details
| Author | OthmanAdi |
| Category | productivity |
| Stars | 13,805 |
| Source | https://github.com/OthmanAdi/planning-with-files |
| Frameworks | anthropic |
Regulatory Compliance
| EU AI Act Risk Class | MINIMAL |
| Compliance Score | 96/100 |
| Jurisdictions | Assessed across 52 jurisdictions |
Popular Alternatives in productivity
Community Reviews
No reviews yet. Be the first to review planning-with-files.
What Is Planning With Files?
Planning With Files is a AI tool in the productivity category. An AI agent for persistent markdown planning, inspired by Manus.
As of March 2026, Planning With Files has 13,805 stars on github, making it one of the most popular tools in its category in the AI ecosystem. But popularity alone does not equal safety — which is why Nerq independently analyzes every tool across 13+ trust signals.
How Nerq Assesses Planning With Files's Safety
Nerq's Trust Score is calculated from 13+ independent signals aggregated into five dimensions. Here is how Planning With Files performs in each:
- Security (1/100): Planning With Files's security posture is poor. This score factors in known CVEs, dependency vulnerabilities, security policy presence, and code signing practices.
- Maintenance (1/100): Planning With Files is potentially abandoned. We track commit frequency, release cadence, issue response times, and PR merge rates.
- Documentation (1/100): Documentation quality is insufficient. This includes README completeness, API documentation, usage examples, and contribution guidelines.
- Compliance (96/100): Planning With Files is broadly compliant. Assessed against regulations in 52 jurisdictions including the EU AI Act, CCPA, and GDPR.
- Community (0/100): Community adoption is limited. Based on GitHub stars, forks, download counts, and ecosystem integrations.
The overall Trust Score of 81.5/100 (A) reflects the weighted combination of these signals. This exceeds the Nerq Verified threshold of 70, indicating the tool meets our standards for production use.
Who Should Use Planning With Files?
Planning With Files is designed for:
- Developers and teams working with productivity tools
- Organizations evaluating AI tools for their stack
- Researchers exploring AI capabilities in this domain
Risk guidance: Planning With Files is well-suited for production environments. Its high trust score indicates robust security, active maintenance, and strong community support. Standard security practices (dependency pinning, access controls, monitoring) are still recommended.
How to Verify Planning With Files's Safety Yourself
While Nerq provides automated trust analysis, we recommend these additional steps before adopting any AI tool:
- Check the source code — Review the repository's security policy, open issues, and recent commits for signs of active maintenance.
- Scan dependencies — Use tools like
npm audit,pip-audit, orsnykto check for known vulnerabilities in Planning With Files's dependency tree. - Review permissions — Understand what access Planning With Files requires. AI tools should follow the principle of least privilege.
- Test in isolation — Run Planning With Files in a sandboxed environment before granting access to production data or systems.
- Monitor continuously — Use Nerq's API to set up automated trust checks:
GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=planning-with-files - Review the license — Confirm that Planning With Files's license is compatible with your intended use case. Pay attention to restrictions on commercial use, redistribution, and derivative works. Some AI tools use dual licensing or have separate terms for enterprise customers that differ from the open-source license.
- Check community signals — Look at the project's issue tracker, discussion forums, and social media presence. A healthy community actively reports bugs, contributes fixes, and discusses security concerns openly. Low community engagement may indicate limited peer review of the codebase.
Common Safety Concerns with Planning With Files
When evaluating whether Planning With Files is safe, consider these category-specific risks:
Understand how Planning With Files processes, stores, and transmits your data. Review the tool's privacy policy and data retention practices, especially for sensitive or proprietary information.
Check Planning With Files's dependency tree for known vulnerabilities. Tools with outdated or unmaintained dependencies pose a higher security risk.
Regularly check for updates to Planning With Files. Security patches and bug fixes are only effective if you're running the latest version.
If Planning With Files connects to external APIs or services, each integration point is a potential attack surface. Audit all third-party connections, verify that data shared with external services is minimized, and ensure that integration credentials are rotated regularly.
Verify that Planning With Files's license is compatible with your intended use case. Some AI tools have restrictive licenses that limit commercial use, redistribution, or derivative works. Using Planning With Files in violation of its license can expose your organization to legal liability.
Planning With Files and the EU AI Act
Planning With Files is classified as Minimal Risk under the EU AI Act. This is the lowest risk category, meaning it faces minimal regulatory requirements. However, transparency obligations still apply.
Nerq's compliance assessment covers 52 jurisdictions worldwide. For organizations deploying AI tools in regulated environments, understanding these classifications is essential for legal compliance.
Best Practices for Using Planning With Files Safely
Whether you're an individual developer or an enterprise team, these practices will help you get the most from Planning With Files while minimizing risk:
Periodically review how Planning With Files is used in your workflow. Check for unexpected behavior, permissions drift, and compliance with your security policies.
Ensure Planning With Files and all its dependencies are running the latest stable versions to benefit from security patches.
Grant Planning With Files only the minimum permissions it needs to function. Avoid granting admin or root access.
Subscribe to Planning With Files's security advisories and vulnerability disclosures. Use Nerq's API to get automated trust score updates.
Create and maintain a clear policy for how Planning With Files is used within your organization, including data handling guidelines and acceptable use cases.
When Should You Avoid Planning With Files?
Even well-trusted tools aren't right for every situation. Consider avoiding Planning With Files in these scenarios:
- Scenarios where Planning With Files's specific capabilities exceed your actual needs — simpler tools may be safer
- Air-gapped environments where the tool cannot receive security updates
- Projects with strict regulatory requirements that haven't been explicitly validated
For each scenario, evaluate whether Planning With Files's trust score of 81.5/100 meets your organization's risk tolerance. The Nerq Verified status indicates general production readiness, but sector-specific requirements may apply.
How Planning With Files Compares to Industry Standards
Nerq indexes over 204,000 AI agents and tools across dozens of categories. Among productivity tools, the average Trust Score is 62/100. Planning With Files's score of 81.5/100 is significantly above the category average of 62/100.
This places Planning With Files in the top tier of productivity tools that Nerq tracks. Tools scoring this far above average typically demonstrate mature security practices, consistent release cadence, and broad community adoption.
Industry benchmarks matter because they contextualize a tool's safety profile. A score that looks moderate in isolation may actually represent strong performance within a challenging category — or vice versa. Nerq's category-relative analysis helps teams make informed decisions by showing not just absolute quality, but how a tool ranks against its direct peers.
Trust Score History
Nerq continuously monitors Planning With Files and recalculates its Trust Score as new data becomes available. Our scoring engine ingests real-time signals from source repositories, vulnerability databases (NVD, OSV.dev), package registries, and community metrics. When a new CVE is published, a major release ships, or maintenance patterns change, Planning With Files's score is updated within 24 hours.
Historical trust trends reveal whether a tool is improving, stable, or declining over time. A tool that consistently maintains or improves its score demonstrates ongoing commitment to security and quality. Conversely, a downward trend may signal reduced maintenance, growing technical debt, or unresolved vulnerabilities. To track Planning With Files's score over time, use the Nerq API: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=planning-with-files&include=history
Nerq retains trust score snapshots at regular intervals, enabling trend analysis across weeks and months. Enterprise users can access detailed historical reports showing how each dimension — security, maintenance, documentation, compliance, and community — has evolved independently, providing granular visibility into which aspects of Planning With Files are strengthening or weakening over time.
Planning With Files vs Alternatives
In the productivity category, Planning With Files scores 81.5/100. It ranks among the top tools in its category. For a detailed comparison, see:
- Planning With Files vs cherry-studio — Trust Score: 84.5/100
- Planning With Files vs ToolJet — Trust Score: 90.9/100
- Planning With Files vs posthog — Trust Score: 74.7/100
Key Takeaways
- Planning With Files has a Trust Score of 81.5/100 (A) and is Nerq Verified.
- Planning With Files demonstrates strong trust signals and is well-suited for production use with standard security precautions.
- Among productivity tools, Planning With Files scores significantly above the category average of 62/100, demonstrating above-average reliability.
- Always verify safety independently — use Nerq's Preflight API for automated, up-to-date trust checks before integration.
Frequently Asked Questions
Add This Badge to YOUR Project
Show users your project is trusted. Add this badge to your README:
[](https://nerq.ai/safe/planning-with-files)
Click to copy. Works on GitHub, GitLab, and any markdown renderer.
pip install nerq && nerq scan
Scans all dependencies for trust scores and security issues.
Related Safety Checks
Disclaimer: Nerq trust scores are automated assessments based on publicly available signals. They are not endorsements or guarantees. Always conduct your own due diligence.