Looking at the project's "credibility" I now have a bit of OCD: first check GitHub, not by how many stars it has (that can also be faked), mainly see if someone is actually maintaining it recently, if there are security issues in the issues, if the developers respond, the worst is no activity for half a year and then a sudden "urgent upgrade." Don't just look at the cover logo in the audit report, flip to the conclusions and unresolved items, especially the pages labeled "Known Risks / Out of Scope," basically just see if they dare to write down the dirty stuff. The same goes for multi-signature upgrades, who the signers are, what the threshold is, whether there's a timelock (giving people time to reconsider), otherwise you might think it's DeFi, but it's actually a "remotely controlled toy." Also, recently, the tags on on-chain data tools have been criticized for being laggy or misleading, which I think is normal... Tagging is like my mom sticking "Good Kid" on me, if it expires, just tear it off. Anyway, don't overly rely on a single metric, cross-verify more, and I’ll hold onto my private keys tightly.