Is gi-dellav/zerostack reliable, safe, and legit?
70/100 · STEADY
STEADY
STEADY (70) because the design choices are genuinely strong — Rust for footprint, ACP support, and the parallel-worktree concurrency model are real engineering, and permissioned file access is a good safety default.
Independently tested by Hlido — we never take payment to rank or review.
Is gi-dellav/zerostack reliable?
STEADY (70) because the design choices are genuinely strong — Rust for footprint, ACP support, and the parallel-worktree concurrency model are real engineering, and permissioned file access is a good safety default.
What it does well:
- Rust implementation optimised for low memory footprint and speed
- Runs multiple agents on one repo in parallel via automatic temporary git worktrees
- ACP server support — connects to editors like Zed as an agent
- Permissioned file access: user controls what the agent may read/write
Where it falls short:
- GPL-3.0 copyleft — a real reuse consideration for commercial/proprietary contexts
- Smaller community and shorter track record than established CLI coding agents
- Independent reliability evidence over time is limited (younger project)
Is gi-dellav/zerostack safe? Any incidents?
No reliability incidents are on record for gi-dellav/zerostack in Hlido's incident registry as of 2026-07-22.
Is gi-dellav/zerostack legit?
gi-dellav/zerostack is a real, independently reviewed product. Hlido tested it against a fixed 5-dimension framework and captured C2PA-signed evidence during testing. Hlido does not accept payment for placement or ranking — so the 70/100 verdict is earned, not bought. How Hlido scores · gi-dellav/zerostack alternatives.