{"passport":{"unfragile":{"@version":"1.0","version":"2026-05","artifact":{"id":"awesome-opencode","slug":"opencode","name":"OpenCode","type":"agent","url":"https://opencode.ai","page_url":"https://unfragile.ai/opencode","categories":["app-builders"],"tags":[],"pricing":{"model":"unknown","free":false,"starting_price":null},"status":"active","verified":false},"capabilities":[{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_0","uri":"capability://code.generation.editing.autonomous.code.generation.from.natural.language.specifications","name":"autonomous code generation from natural language specifications","description":"Generates complete code implementations from natural language requirements by decomposing tasks into subtasks, maintaining context across multiple generation steps, and iteratively refining outputs based on intermediate validation. Uses an agentic loop pattern where the AI reasons about what code to write, generates it, and validates against the original intent before returning final implementations.","intents":["I want to describe what code should do in plain English and get a working implementation without writing it myself","I need to generate boilerplate or scaffold code for a new feature quickly","I want an AI to break down a complex coding task into smaller pieces and implement each one"],"best_for":["solo developers building prototypes or MVPs who want to accelerate initial implementation","teams using AI-assisted development workflows where natural language specs are preferred over manual coding","developers working on well-defined, non-ambiguous coding tasks with clear success criteria"],"limitations":["Requires clear, unambiguous natural language specifications — vague requirements lead to incorrect implementations","May struggle with domain-specific or highly specialized code patterns not well-represented in training data","No guarantee of production-ready code without human review and testing","Context window limitations may prevent handling very large codebases or complex multi-file generation tasks"],"requires":["API access to underlying LLM (OpenAI, Anthropic, or compatible provider)","Clear specification of target programming language and framework","Node.js 16+ or Python 3.8+ runtime environment"],"input_types":["natural language text (requirements, specifications, descriptions)","code snippets (for context or examples)","structured specifications (JSON, YAML)"],"output_types":["source code (Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Go, Rust, etc.)","code with inline documentation","multi-file code structures"],"categories":["code-generation-editing","planning-reasoning"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_1","uri":"capability://memory.knowledge.codebase.aware.context.injection.and.retrieval","name":"codebase-aware context injection and retrieval","description":"Maintains awareness of the existing codebase by retrieving relevant code files, function signatures, and architectural patterns to inject into the generation context. Uses semantic or syntactic indexing to identify related code sections that should inform new code generation, ensuring generated code follows existing conventions and integrates properly with the codebase.","intents":["I want the AI to understand my existing code structure and generate code that fits naturally into my project","I need the agent to reference existing functions and patterns when generating new code","I want generated code to follow the same style, naming conventions, and architectural patterns as my codebase"],"best_for":["teams with established codebases who want AI-assisted development that respects existing architecture","developers working on large projects where consistency and integration are critical","projects with strong architectural patterns or domain-specific conventions"],"limitations":["Requires initial indexing of the codebase, which adds setup time and computational overhead","May miss relevant context if codebase uses non-standard naming or organization patterns","Performance degrades with very large codebases (100k+ lines) without proper indexing strategy","Cannot understand implicit architectural decisions not reflected in code structure"],"requires":["Access to local codebase files or remote repository","Indexing mechanism (tree-sitter, AST parser, or semantic embeddings)","Sufficient storage for codebase index"],"input_types":["source code files","project structure metadata","function signatures and type definitions"],"output_types":["contextual code generation","integration-aware implementations"],"categories":["memory-knowledge","code-generation-editing"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_2","uri":"capability://planning.reasoning.multi.step.task.decomposition.and.execution.planning","name":"multi-step task decomposition and execution planning","description":"Breaks down complex coding tasks into sequential subtasks with explicit dependencies and execution order, creating an execution plan that the agent follows step-by-step. Uses planning algorithms to identify task dependencies, determine optimal execution order, and track completion state across multiple generation and validation cycles.","intents":["I want the AI to tackle a complex feature by breaking it into smaller, manageable pieces","I need the agent to understand task dependencies and execute them in the right order","I want visibility into what steps the agent is taking to complete a large coding task"],"best_for":["developers implementing complex features that naturally decompose into subtasks","teams that want explainability in how the AI approaches large coding problems","projects where task ordering and dependencies are critical to success"],"limitations":["Task decomposition quality depends on LLM's ability to understand problem structure — poorly specified tasks may decompose incorrectly","Overhead of planning and tracking adds latency compared to direct generation","May over-decompose simple tasks, adding unnecessary complexity","Circular dependencies or missed dependencies can cause execution failures"],"requires":["LLM capable of structured reasoning and planning","Task state tracking mechanism","Dependency graph representation"],"input_types":["high-level task descriptions","feature specifications","requirements documents"],"output_types":["execution plans (structured task lists with dependencies)","completed code implementations","task completion status and logs"],"categories":["planning-reasoning","automation-workflow"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_3","uri":"capability://code.generation.editing.iterative.code.validation.and.refinement.loop","name":"iterative code validation and refinement loop","description":"Validates generated code against specifications through automated testing, linting, type checking, and semantic analysis, then iteratively refines implementations based on validation failures. The agent receives validation feedback and regenerates or modifies code to fix issues, repeating until validation passes or max iterations reached.","intents":["I want the AI to generate code and automatically fix it if it has syntax errors or logic issues","I need generated code to pass type checking and linting before I review it","I want the agent to validate that generated code actually implements the requested functionality"],"best_for":["developers who want higher-quality generated code with fewer manual fixes required","teams with strict code quality standards (type safety, linting compliance)","projects where automated validation is feasible (unit tests, type checkers available)"],"limitations":["Validation quality limited by available testing infrastructure — projects without tests cannot validate logic","Type checking only works for statically-typed languages; limited value for dynamic languages","Refinement loop adds latency (potentially 2-5x slower than single-pass generation)","May get stuck in refinement loops if validation criteria are contradictory or impossible to meet","Cannot validate against implicit requirements not captured in tests or type definitions"],"requires":["Automated validation tools (linters, type checkers, test runners)","Ability to execute code or run validation in sandboxed environment","Clear validation criteria and success metrics"],"input_types":["generated source code","validation rules and criteria","test cases or specifications"],"output_types":["validated source code","validation reports and error logs","refinement history and iterations"],"categories":["code-generation-editing","safety-moderation"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_4","uri":"capability://tool.use.integration.tool.use.orchestration.for.external.api.integration","name":"tool-use orchestration for external api integration","description":"Enables the agent to call external tools and APIs (file operations, package managers, build systems, testing frameworks) as part of code generation and validation workflows. Implements function calling with schema-based tool definitions, allowing the agent to invoke tools, receive results, and incorporate tool outputs into subsequent reasoning and code generation steps.","intents":["I want the AI to install dependencies, run tests, and execute build commands as part of the code generation process","I need the agent to read and write files, check existing code, and integrate with my development tools","I want the AI to use external APIs and services to enhance code generation (e.g., API documentation lookup, package search)"],"best_for":["developers who want end-to-end automation from specification to tested, integrated code","teams with complex development workflows involving multiple tools and systems","projects where the agent needs to interact with external services or APIs"],"limitations":["Tool execution adds latency and potential failure points — tool unavailability blocks code generation","Security risk if agent has access to sensitive operations (file deletion, credential access) without proper guardrails","Tool schema must be precisely defined — ambiguous or incomplete schemas lead to incorrect tool usage","Sandboxing and isolation requirements add complexity and may limit tool capabilities","Tool availability and compatibility varies across environments (local vs cloud, Windows vs Linux)"],"requires":["Tool definitions with JSON schemas or similar specifications","Execution environment with access to required tools and APIs","Security boundaries and permission controls for tool access","Error handling for tool failures and timeouts"],"input_types":["tool definitions (schemas, signatures)","tool invocation requests from agent","tool execution results and outputs"],"output_types":["tool execution results","file system changes","test results and logs","API responses"],"categories":["tool-use-integration","automation-workflow"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_5","uri":"capability://code.generation.editing.multi.language.code.generation.with.language.specific.patterns","name":"multi-language code generation with language-specific patterns","description":"Generates code in multiple programming languages (Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Go, Rust, etc.) while respecting language-specific idioms, conventions, and best practices. Uses language-specific templates, AST patterns, and style guides to ensure generated code follows each language's conventions rather than producing generic or language-agnostic code.","intents":["I want to generate code in my project's language (Python, Go, Rust, etc.) with proper idioms and conventions","I need the AI to understand language-specific patterns and generate code that looks native to the language","I want to generate code for multiple languages in the same project with consistent quality"],"best_for":["polyglot projects using multiple programming languages","teams with strong language-specific conventions and style guides","developers who want generated code to pass language-specific linters and formatters"],"limitations":["Quality varies significantly across languages — better support for popular languages (Python, JavaScript) than niche languages","Language-specific patterns and idioms require specialized knowledge; less common languages may have poor pattern coverage","Maintaining language-specific templates and rules adds complexity and maintenance burden","Cross-language code generation (e.g., generating bindings between languages) is not supported"],"requires":["Language-specific code templates and pattern libraries","Language-specific linters and formatters for validation","Knowledge of language conventions and idioms"],"input_types":["target programming language specification","requirements and specifications","language-specific context (frameworks, libraries, conventions)"],"output_types":["language-native source code","code following language conventions and idioms"],"categories":["code-generation-editing"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-opencode__cap_6","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.agent.state.persistence.and.resumable.workflows","name":"agent state persistence and resumable workflows","description":"Persists agent execution state (task progress, generated code, validation results, context) to enable resuming interrupted workflows without losing progress. Implements state serialization and recovery mechanisms that allow long-running code generation tasks to be paused and resumed, with full context restoration.","intents":["I want to pause a long-running code generation task and resume it later without losing progress","I need the agent to recover gracefully from failures and continue from where it left off","I want to inspect and modify agent state during execution for debugging or manual intervention"],"best_for":["teams running long-duration code generation tasks that may be interrupted","developers who need to debug or manually intervene in agent workflows","systems requiring high reliability and fault tolerance for code generation"],"limitations":["State persistence adds storage overhead and complexity","Resuming from saved state may not work if underlying LLM API or tool availability changes","State serialization/deserialization can introduce subtle bugs if context is not fully captured","Large codebases or complex task states may result in very large state objects"],"requires":["Persistent storage (database, file system, or cloud storage)","State serialization format (JSON, Protocol Buffers, etc.)","Checkpoint and recovery mechanisms"],"input_types":["agent execution state","task progress and context","generated code and validation results"],"output_types":["persisted state snapshots","recovery checkpoints","execution logs and history"],"categories":["automation-workflow","memory-knowledge"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0}],"trust":{"score":26,"verified":false,"data_access_risk":"high","permissions":["API access to underlying LLM (OpenAI, Anthropic, or compatible provider)","Clear specification of target programming language and framework","Node.js 16+ or Python 3.8+ runtime environment","Access to local codebase files or remote repository","Indexing mechanism (tree-sitter, AST parser, or semantic embeddings)","Sufficient storage for codebase index","LLM capable of structured reasoning and planning","Task state tracking mechanism","Dependency graph representation","Automated validation tools (linters, type checkers, test runners)"],"failure_modes":["Requires clear, unambiguous natural language specifications — vague requirements lead to incorrect implementations","May struggle with domain-specific or highly specialized code patterns not well-represented in training data","No guarantee of production-ready code without human review and testing","Context window limitations may prevent handling very large codebases or complex multi-file generation tasks","Requires initial indexing of the codebase, which adds setup time and computational overhead","May miss relevant context if codebase uses non-standard naming or organization patterns","Performance degrades with very large codebases (100k+ lines) without proper indexing strategy","Cannot understand implicit architectural decisions not reflected in code structure","Task decomposition quality depends on LLM's ability to understand problem structure — poorly specified tasks may decompose incorrectly","Overhead of planning and tracking adds latency compared to direct generation","builder identity is not verified yet","no observed match outcomes yet"],"rank_breakdown":{"adoption":0.05,"quality":0.24,"ecosystem":0.25,"match_graph":0.25,"freshness":0.75,"weights":{"adoption":0.25,"quality":0.25,"ecosystem":0.1,"match_graph":0.28,"freshness":0.12}},"observed_outcomes":{"matches":0,"success_rate":0,"avg_confidence":0,"top_intents":[],"last_matched_at":null},"maintenance":{"status":"active","updated_at":"2026-06-17T09:51:03.579Z","last_scraped_at":"2026-05-03T14:00:20.516Z","last_commit":null},"community":{"stars":null,"forks":null,"weekly_downloads":null,"model_downloads":null,"model_likes":null}},"distribution":{"claim_url":"https://unfragile.ai/submit?claim=opencode","compare_url":"https://unfragile.ai/compare?artifact=opencode"}},"signature":"/DJXhYKv+7A0W9mb4LYkHoWNNZoo8X/1Dc2mIi4YXPPY9l86SvY3HhIETbjbpS1hTFd9/GXQf4vphVLNy+JpDA==","signedAt":"2026-06-19T20:40:17.189Z","signedBy":"unfragile.ai","version":1},"_links":{"self":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/passport/opencode","artifact":"https://unfragile.ai/opencode","verify":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/verify?slug=opencode","publicKey":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/trust-passport-public-key","spec":"https://unfragile.ai/trust","schema":"https://unfragile.ai/schema.json","docs":"https://unfragile.ai/docs"}}