How is StackMap different from an awesome-list?

Lists tell you what exists. StackMap maps typed relationships — complements, alternative, built_with — and every connection carries a human-written "why", including when NOT to use a tool.

Does anything publish automatically?

No. Every repo and every edge goes through a proposal that a human approves, sharpens, or refuses. Stars and activity data refresh automatically twice a week; judgments never do.

How we curate

Lists tell you what exists. StackMap tells you what goes together — and why.

148 repos17 topics240 typed connections — every one human-reviewed

Typed relationships, not links

Every connection in the catalog is one of three kinds:

complements — use them together; one covers what the other doesn't.
alternative — different project, same job; we say when to pick which.
built_with — depends on, builds on, or runs on.

And every connection carries a written "why" — the sentence a colleague would tell you over your shoulder. This is what a why looks like:

LangGraph → pairs well with LangSmith

Why it fitsOnce your graph runs in production you'll want to see why a run failed — LangSmith traces every node.

Nothing publishes without a human

1 · Draft. A new repo is analyzed against the whole catalog — summary, topics, and candidate typed edges with confidence scores.
2 · Review. A human reads every proposed edge and its why. Weak edges are cut, wrong ones rejected, the note sharpened. Repos that don't earn a place are refused.
3 · Publish. Only approved entries reach the catalog. The curator's take on each repo page includes when not to use a tool — that's the part no awesome-list will tell you.

And we do say no

Curation you can't see is curation you can't trust. Recent refusals, with the reason:

zero-employee-company-book — A book about AI-run companies, not a tool you can put in a stack. (scope)
jobsync — An end-user job-tracker app that uses AI — no honest topic in a map of AI-stack building blocks. (scope)
pake — Webpage-to-desktop-app packager — a superb tool with zero AI/agent relevance; wrong map. (scope)
google-maps-agent-skills — Right scope (agent skills), 121 stars and weeks quiet — revisit when it grows. (maturity)
seo-geo-claude-skills — A signpost repo pointing at its own replacement, 85 stars — map the canonical home if it earns it. (maturity)
wigolo — Right scope (local-first web MCP), public beta at 85 stars — revisit when it grows. (maturity)
awesome-harness-engineering — An awesome-list, not a tool — nothing can honestly pair with a link collection. (scope)
FlashDB — Embedded MCU database, not an embedding database — no honest topic or edge in an AI/agent catalog. (scope)
SwarnDB — Interesting vector+graph idea at 13 stars with no license — the catalog vouches for what it maps. (maturity)

Kept honest, automatically

Stars, activity and imagery refresh twice a week straight from GitHub, so a card saying updated yesterday means yesterday. Know a repo that belongs on the map? Suggest it — every submission goes through the same human review.

Curious who's behind this? About StackMap & ShipWithAI →