Mozaik Agent Runtime

The README makes data flow relatively visible by explaining that RuntimeState is shared mutable state, events fan out to every joined participant, and there is no internal/external event split, earning 2 for transparency. Tools can run through runLoop and an interceptor can rewrite tool-call input, but the materials do not show permission isolation, per-action user approval, sensitive-data safeguards, external-effect controls, or rollback, so least privilege, confirmation, sensitive-data handling, external effects, and rollback each score 1. The README names environment variables for provider keys but gives no storage or leakage protections; dependency security has no audit evidence, so both score 1. An author and team are named, but publisher identity is unverified and maintenance responsibility is unclear, so source attribution scores 1.

The README gives concrete behavior for initialization, repeated initialization, asynchronous event delivery, and fire-and-forget loops, and these descriptions are broadly consistent, earning 2 for self-consistency. No dependency locking or availability assurances are shown, so dependency availability scores 1. Clear error text is documented for calls before initialization and repeated initialization, earning 2; failure propagation or recovery for asynchronous processors is only lightly covered.

The README describes collaborative, multi-agent, observer, and event-reaction scenarios and includes TypeScript API examples, earning 2 for audience and scenarios. It states boundaries such as having no built-in situation specifications, broadcasting events to all participants, and running loops in the background, earning 2. Handler matching is explicitly driven by event type and producerId predicates, though users must define those predicates, earning 2 for trigger precision. Installation, package entry points, and provider environment variables are documented, but the runtime support matrix is incomplete, so environment fit scores 2.

The README is organized into clear sections with API tables and diagrams, earning 3 for information architecture. It provides npm, yarn, and pnpm installation commands and credential setup, but not complete prerequisites, earning 2 for install notes. Package and API names and a version field are clear, but migration guidance is absent, so naming stability scores 2. Examples cover core patterns and link to an external examples repository, but there is no FAQ, earning 2. Limitations including no built-in specifications, shared mutable state, non-awaited delivery, and fire-and-forget loops are documented, earning 2. LICENSE and package.json both identify MIT, earning 3. package.json shows a beta version but no changelog, earning 1 for versioning and changelog. The README points to contribution guidelines and package.json names an author, but neither makes maintenance responsibility or update commitments clear, earning 1.

The README supplies usable API snippets, event tables, and loop-state descriptions that support an initial implementation, earning 2 for output usability. Concurrency, shared events, and interception provide a concrete framework value proposition, but no quantified comparisons or operating results are supplied, earning 2 for marginal value. Provider credentials and multiple SDK dependencies are required, while the materials do not weigh benefits against integration costs, so cost-benefit scores 1.

Most API and behavior claims are tied to named functions, events, or code snippets, earning 2 for claim traceability. The supplied materials are README, LICENSE, and package.json; a test script is listed but no test contents are provided for cross-checking, so cross-source corroboration scores 1. The README presents goals as project claims and explains specific behavior with API/code examples, but offers no independent validation, earning 2 for fact/inference separation.