OpenLogi — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

Preview (pre-1.0). This repo hasn't declared a stable release, so it's judged against a relaxed, pre-production bar.

The system holds a strong overall standing at 73%, indicating a robust asset that is largely healthy but carries specific operational risks. While the codebase is mature and well-architected, gaps in observability and release safety create unnecessary friction for the business. This score reflects a solid foundation that requires targeted attention to maintain its reliability and speed of delivery.

The scale of this investment is significant, comprising over 143,000 lines of production code with a rebuild cost estimated at €250,000. This represents a substantial value tied up in the platform, making incremental improvement far more efficient than replacement. The high proportion of complex logic suggests that the system’s value lies in its nuanced business rules, which are currently well-protected by strong architectural patterns and high code quality.

The primary risk lies in production visibility. Without structured logging across all modules, diagnosing issues in live environments is difficult, leading to longer outage resolution times and higher support costs. This lack of observability directly impacts customer trust and operational efficiency. Additionally, the release process lacks visible protection rules, creating a security exposure where defective builds could potentially reach users before being caught. This gap in governance increases the risk of service disruption and reputational damage.

Despite these risks, the system demonstrates genuine strength in its core engineering. The architecture is sound, and the code health is excellent, meaning developers can work efficiently without fighting technical debt. The high maturity score indicates that new team members can likely pick up the work with minimal friction. These strengths provide a stable base for future enhancements, provided the immediate operational blind spots are addressed.

The highest-leverage action is to extend structured logging to all runnable modules. This single step will dramatically improve diagnostic speed and reduce the cost of incidents, offering the best return on effort. Once visibility is secured, the team should address release protections to ensure safe deployments. This focused approach minimizes disruption while maximizing operational resilience.

Code Health 91% ★ Exemplary Architecture 92% ★ Exemplary Maturity 71% Strong Readiness 66% Strong Security 79% Adequate · gated by D36 Event Sourcing 100% ★ Exemplary Performance 100% ★ Exemplary

How the score is built — each lens's share of the headline Width is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.

Readiness 66% · 46% weightMaturity 71% · 25% weightSecurity 79% · 14% weightCode Health 91% · 8% weightArchitecture 92% · 4% weightEvent Sourcing 100% · 2% weightPerformance 100% · 1% weight

Raise Readiness 66 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 73 → ~75.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

New since the last scan (61+)

61 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-11) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

D1 · openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into (cyclomatic 23) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/arm.rs
D1 · openlogi_device::session::capture::monitor (cyclomatic 22) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/capture.rs
D1 · CaptureAccum::on_event (cyclomatic 21) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/accum.rs
D1 · openlogi_agent_core::watchers::capture_manager::run (cyclomatic 17) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/capture_manager.rs
D1 · ActionExecutor::dispatch_to (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs
D2 · openlogi_device::session::capture::monitor (cognitive 41) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/capture.rs
D2 · openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into (cognitive 41) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/arm.rs
D2 · CaptureAccum::on_event (cognitive 35) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/accum.rs
D2 · openlogi_overlay::ipc::send_commands_with (cognitive 28) crates/openlogi-overlay/src/ipc.rs
D2 · Config::migrate_owner_locked_gestures (cognitive 24) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/migrate.rs
D2 · ActionExecutor::dispatch_to (cognitive 23) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs
D2 · openlogi_agent_core::watchers::capture_manager::run (cognitive 23) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/capture_manager.rs
D2 · openlogi_camera::uvc_macos::scan_descriptors (cognitive 22) crates/openlogi-camera/src/uvc_macos.rs
D2 · openlogi_desktop::features::camera::controls::rows::control_row (cognitive 22) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls/rows.rs
D2 · AppView::render_content (cognitive 20) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs
D2 · Config::migrate_thumbwheel_native_direction (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/migrate.rs
D2 · WlrForeignToplevelSource::observe (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux/foreground/wlr_foreign_toplevel.rs
D2 · openlogi_overlay::ipc::observe_invocations (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-overlay/src/ipc.rs
D2 · openlogi_device::session::host_switch::monitor_host_switch (cognitive 17) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/host_switch.rs
D2 · openlogi_camera::capture_macos::open_session (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_macos.rs
D2 · openlogi_hook::linux::pointer::context_on_connection (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux/pointer.rs
D2 · openlogi_hook::linux::foreground::stop::poll_source_or_stop (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux/foreground/stop.rs
D3 · MethodTooLong: AppView.render_content crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs
D4 · Near-duplicate member pair (34 shared lines) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs
D4 · Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (11–16 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator/devices.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (11–12 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/button/worker.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-hid/src/transport.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/probe/bolt.rs
D5 · Off the main sequence: openlogi-assets
D5 · Off the main sequence: openlogi-device-registry
D5 · Off the main sequence: openlogi-core
D5 · Off the main sequence: openlogi-fixture
D5 · Off the main sequence: openlogi-camera
D15 · Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs
D15 · Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs
D15 · Hotspot: xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs.rs xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs.rs
D15 · Hotspot: xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs/steps.rs xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs/steps.rs
D15 · Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs
D15 · Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-device/src/thumbwheel.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/thumbwheel.rs
D22 · Ambiguous duplication: Two methods with nearly identical names suggest different return types or behaviors (e.g., parsed vs raw bytes), but the signatures are identical (`Result`). Without documentation, it is unclear if one is deprecated, if they return different types, or if one is a mistake.
D22 · Ambiguous duplication: `latest_frame` and `take_frame` likely differ in semantics (e.g., non-blocking peek vs. blocking/consuming), but the identical signatures and similar naming create confusion about which to use for non-blocking reads.
D22 · Duplicate intent across types: Both `Config` and `ConfigFile` expose `load_or_default`. It is unclear if `ConfigFile` is a lower-level utility and `Config` is the high-level facade, or if they are redundant entry points for the same operation.
D22 · Duplicate intent across types: Same as above, `load_from_path` exists on both `Config` and `ConfigFile` with identical signatures.
D22 · Inconsistent naming for save operations: `save_atomic` implies a specific implementation detail (atomicity) rather than a destination, while `save_to_path` is explicit. If `save_atomic` saves to the default path, it should be named `save()` or `save_default()`.
D29 · REDACTED
D29 · REDACTED
D29 · REDACTED
D29 · REDACTED
D29 · REDACTED
D35 · Change coupling: binding_editor.rs ↔ view.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs
D35 · Change coupling: function_row.rs ↔ view.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs
D35 · Change coupling: route.rs ↔ pairing.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs
D35 · Change coupling: tests.rs ↔ keyboard.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/tests.rs

A full-fidelity diff against the previous run's complete recorded findings — line-move tolerant: a finding that only shifted line counts as unchanged, only genuinely new titles/files surface here.

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €82,000–€410,000

Cost to rebuild	€82,000–€410,000 (0.8–2.6 person-years (1,363–4,324 h), ~1–4 engineers)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	1.1× (at 73% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape	Large · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~1.7 person-years of build effort (about ~€250,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 66% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.1) — vertical slice × a 1.1× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

The highest-leverage moves; the full ranked list is in the Roadmap below.

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.

+6.2 pts · Medium effort · Observability

Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.

+6.2 pts · Medium effort · Security & performance tooling

The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.

+6.2 pts · Medium effort · Deployment & Rollback

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage

Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production. The rest can wait behind it.

Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort

→ Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.

Architecture — module dependency graph

Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways — a layering smell or cycle. A clean layered graph has none.

Architecture — module dependency matrix

Rows and columns are the same modules, ordered so that a module only depends on ones above it. A cell means the row depends on the column, and its number is how many type pairs create that dependency. Read one thing: is anything above the diagonal? A mark there is a dependency cycle. (A cycle is all this shows — an unusual but cycle-free dependency sits below the diagonal like any other.)

484 modules, 1143 dependencies. 15 dependency cycles across 64 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 444 more are not drawn.

Module dependency matrix. The row depends on the column; the number is how many type pairs create the dependency. A cell above the diagonal is part of a dependency cycle.
depends on →	1 openlogi_camera.uvc_windows	2 openlogi_core.app	3 openlogi_core.binding.action	4 openlogi_core.binding.button	5 openlogi_core.hid.dpi	6 openlogi_desktop.state.device_key	7 openlogi_agent_core.runtime.button	8 openlogi_core.binding.action_ring	9 openlogi_core.hid.route	10 openlogi_core.hid.smartshift	11 openlogi_hidpp.channel	12 openlogi_hook	13 openlogi_core.config.settings	14 openlogi_core.device	15 openlogi_device.channel	16 openlogi_core.config	17 openlogi_core.hid.light	18 openlogi_desktop.services.assets	20 openlogi_fixture.schema	21 openlogi_hidpp.receiver.bolt	22 openlogi_desktop.state.devices	23 openlogi_device.device_io	25 openlogi_ipc.ipc	28 openlogi_device.backend	29 openlogi_core.hid.error	30 openlogi_device.channel.registry	31 openlogi_agent_core.hardware	32 openlogi_device.inventory	34 openlogi_agent_core.hardware.context	35 openlogi_agent_core.runtime	36 openlogi_agent_core.orchestrator	38 openlogi_agent.server	39 openlogi_agent.startup	40 openlogi_agent.lifecycle
1 openlogi_camera.uvc_windows
2 openlogi_core.app
3 openlogi_core.binding.action
4 openlogi_core.binding.button
5 openlogi_core.hid.dpi
6 openlogi_desktop.state.device_key
7 openlogi_agent_core.runtime.button			3	2																										2
8 openlogi_core.binding.action_ring			3
9 openlogi_core.hid.route														2
10 openlogi_core.hid.smartshift													2
11 openlogi_hidpp.channel																				1
12 openlogi_hook		2																																3
13 openlogi_core.config.settings										4
14 openlogi_core.device									1
15 openlogi_device.channel									1		1
16 openlogi_core.config			1	1	1			3					7	1
17 openlogi_core.hid.light													1
18 openlogi_desktop.services.assets														3
19 openlogi_desktop.ui.theme													1
20 openlogi_fixture.schema					1				3					8
21 openlogi_hidpp.receiver.bolt											2			1
22 openlogi_desktop.state.devices						1			1					6		1		2
23 openlogi_device.device_io																				1
24 openlogi_hidpp.feature											5									2
25 openlogi_ipc.ipc		1			1			1	1	1			1	3			1
26 openlogi_agent.bin.mock_agent					1			1	3	1			1	5			1		2				15
27 openlogi_desktop.state		1	1	1	2	1		4	1	1		1	13			1	1	2			1		4
28 openlogi_device.backend																						1
29 openlogi_core.hid.error																								1			1
30 openlogi_device.channel.registry									4		1				1					2				1
31 openlogi_agent_core.hardware					2				3	1			3		1							1			2	2
32 openlogi_device.inventory									1		1			2										4		1
33 openlogi_device.session.host_switch	1								1		1				2					1		2				2
34 openlogi_agent_core.hardware.context									1				1				1					1						1
35 openlogi_agent_core.runtime			6	1			7																				2
36 openlogi_agent_core.orchestrator		1							3				1	4		1						1	1			1	2		2
37 openlogi_agent_core.watchers.gesture							4													4						1	3			1
38 openlogi_agent.server					1			1	3	1			1	1			1			1			9							1	4
39 openlogi_agent.startup																1														2	5	1
40 openlogi_agent.lifecycle												1				2															2	1	3

Dependency, pointing down the layeringAbove the diagonal — part of a cycleThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 91% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 7.4 D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 6.7 D3 · Rust God Classes 9.6 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.9 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 10.0

At a glance — Architecture · 92% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 8.1 D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 7.1 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 9.9 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.7 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX7 · Repo Slice cohesion 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

The Bad

D7 · Rust Architectural Integrity 6.0 D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 6.0

At a glance — Maturity · 71% · Strong ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.8 D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 8.9 D20 · Rust ADR Quality 9.0 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 6.9 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 9.0

The Ugly

M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 4.0

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Strong ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D11 · Rust Test Reliability 10.0 D13 · Rust Secret Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 6.6 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Bad

P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0

The Ugly

P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 4.0

At a glance — Security · 79% · Adequate · gated by D36 ·

The Good

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 10.0 D30 · Rust Dependency Vulnerabilities 8.1 D37 · Rust Vulnerability-disclosure Policy 10.0 D43 · Rust Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · Rust Platform End-of-Life 10.0

The Bad

D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 5.0

The Ugly

D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5

At a glance — Event Sourcing · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

ES1 · Repo Fold determinism 10.0 ES2 · Repo Immutable events 10.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A03:2021 — Injection	88	High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components	10	Medium

Roadmap

First, extend structured logging to all remaining modules to ensure full production diagnosability, and enable automated dependency review tools to strengthen security and performance. Next, verify that deployment approval gates are properly configured or use draft releases to prevent bad builds from reaching users. Finally, update the root README with clear testing instructions and organize architecture decision records in a dedicated, easily searchable directory.

Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.	+6.2 pts	Medium	Observability
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.	+6.2 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.	+6.2 pts	Medium	Deployment & Rollback
Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.	+4.2 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)
Move ADRs under docs/adr/ (or docs/adrs/) and name them NNNN-title.md so they're easy to find.	+4.2 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 84 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once.	+0.5 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.9/10.	+0.9 pts	Medium	Documentation Quality
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED.	+0.4 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 83 files carrying findings, judged against the Preview bar: 0% slop · 10% mixed · 90% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: Medium advisory (unmaintained): REDACTED
crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs	5.9	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: openlogi_device::channel::route::open_route_channel (cyclomatic 18)
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs	5.9	Mixed	God Classes: FileTooLong: keyboard/function_row.rs
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs	7.2	Near-clean	Cognitive Complexity: AppState::finish_light_command (cognitive 26)
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs	7.2	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Near-duplicate member pair (34 shared lines)
REDACTED	7.2	Near-clean	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
crates/openlogi-core/src/config/identity.rs	7.4	Near-clean	Cyclomatic Complexity: openlogi_core::config::identity::fold (cyclomatic 37)
crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs	7.4	Near-clean	Cyclomatic Complexity: openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage (cyclomatic 21)
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs	7.4	Near-clean	Cyclomatic Complexity: AppView::new (cyclomatic 19)
crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs	7.4	Near-clean	Cyclomatic Complexity: KeyboardManagerState::reconcile (cyclomatic 17)
crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator.rs	7.4	Near-clean	God Classes: ClassTooLong: Orchestrator
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs	7.4	Near-clean	God Classes: FileTooLong: mouse/view.rs
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs	7.4	Near-clean	God Classes: FileTooLong: mouse/inspector.rs
crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs	7.4	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (6 lines × 2)
crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/arm.rs	7.8	Near-clean	Cyclomatic Complexity: openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into (cyclomatic 23)

How the grades work

Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.

Critical — 88

A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here tends to cause failures elsewhere.

Serious — 179

Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to carry for two years either.

Minor — 5

Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions. Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.

Could not be resolved — 49

Something this survey could not settle from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each one is named under Limitations.

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 36 of 42 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 6 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.

What we checked — 42 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D7D9D11D13D15D17D19D20D21D22D26D28D29D30D34D35D36D37D43D44AX10AX3AX5AX7AX9ES1ES2M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P6PF3

Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 253 of 272 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.

Tools & methods

The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.

Method	Backs	Version	Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis	Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering	5.3.0	✓ deterministic
Native secret scanner	Hardcoded secrets / credentials	1.0.0	✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)	Code duplication	1.0.0	✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)	Line & branch coverage	10.0.400	✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnet	Outdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies	10.0.400	✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2Sharp	Churn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history	2.43.0 · 0.31.0	✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy	Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR	1.86.0 · 0.69.3	✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)	Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement	Local LLM	◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0e9cb-0baa-750a-acfb-4e0d424a55dc.

The exact command behind every deep-scan dimension — tool, version, invocation and retained raw output — is in Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail.

Run transparency — what happened this run

What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.

D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.rs) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 57 direct Cargo declaration(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs crates.io, which could not be reached on this run, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. A hotspot's complexity is meant to be the worst body its churn actually touched. For crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action.rs that could not be established — the complexity reader for the file reports no body extents, or the history carries no per-line attribution — so the row quotes the file's worst body, which the counted changes may never have touched. The churn count is unaffected.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (80 contributor(s) across 1510 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 84% of the history; the other 79 hold 0.2% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX2 Stateful singletons — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. The Runtime Evidence tier boots an app only via docker-compose, an Aspire AppHost, or a Dockerfile. None was found, so no live runtime a11y/egress/header evidence was collected. You can widen what we reach: add a docker-compose.yml (or an Aspire AppHost) that brings the app up with its dependencies. Watchdog then boots it in an isolated sandbox and gathers real runtime evidence — you change nothing in your pipeline (no CI step, no SDK).
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P10 Library API & versioning — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads NuGet packaging and C# public API only, and no .NET project was loaded for this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
PF1 Benchmark discipline — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X10 Duplicated predicate — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.

Limitations & what we did not check

Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.

Per-dimension blind spots

For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D7 Architectural Integrity: Layering is checked against detected/declared rules — an architecture whose boundaries live in convention or in code review, not in a rule a scanner can read, is not enforced here.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (6): D19, D20, D21, D22, D26, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity7.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.

Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

21 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was openlogi_core::config::identity::fold at 37. A further 21 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being ActionRingIcon::asset_path at 54 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 11 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action_ring/icon.rs (ActionRingIcon::asset_path at 54), crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action.rs (Action::label at 53), crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/effect.rs (Action::effect at 49), crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs (openlogi_desktop::features::binding_editor::action_icon_path at 44), crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject.rs (openlogi_inject::inject::hid_usage_to_windows at 31), and 6 more not listed here. They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into (cyclomatic 23) · ×5crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/arm.rs:161

openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage (cyclomatic 21) · ×4crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs:431

openlogi_core::config::identity::fold (cyclomatic 37) · ×2crates/openlogi-core/src/config/identity.rs:247

openlogi_desktop::services::assets::glow::compute_glow_geometry (cyclomatic 16) · ×2crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs:98

CaptureAccum::on_event (cyclomatic 21)crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/accum.rs:104

+ 7 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 5 openlogi_device finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with arm.rs, pairing.rs, capture.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 openlogi_agent_core finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with host_switch.rs, foreground_app.rs, capture_manager.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 openlogi_core finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with identity.rs, key_combo.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity6.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.

Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

52 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native at 50.

openlogi_device::pairing::drive (cognitive 47) · ×7crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs:357

openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native (cognitive 50) · ×6crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs:105

openlogi_hook::linux::device_thread (cognitive 32) · ×3crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux.rs:437

openlogi_overlay::ipc::send_commands_with (cognitive 28) · ×3crates/openlogi-overlay/src/ipc.rs:259

AppState::finish_light_command (cognitive 26) · ×3crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:308

+ 20 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 7 openlogi_device finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with pairing.rs, capture.rs, arm.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 openlogi_agent_core finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with foreground_app.rs, pairing.rs, host_switch.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 openlogi_hook finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with linux.rs, pointer.rs, stop.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes9.6 / 10Stronggated by 13 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").

Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

13 god class(es) detected.

FileTooLong: keyboard/function_row.rs · ×6crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs

TooManyMethods: AppState · ×3crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state.rs:161

TooManyFunctions: openlogi_hid::host · ×2crates/openlogi-hid/src/host.rs:37

ClassTooLong: Orchestratorcrates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator.rs:170

MethodTooLong: AppView.render_contentcrates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs:477

What to do

Resolve the 6 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with function_row.rs, detail.rs, mock_agent.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with state.rs, config.rs, orchestrator.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 TooManyFunctions finding(s) in God Classes — start with host.rs, linux.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.9 / 10Stronggated by 37 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.

Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

35 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 2 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 2 of the 37 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×8crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs:572

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×3crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/button/worker.rs:145

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×3crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:92

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×3crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:534

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×2crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:513

+ 17 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 8 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with views.rs (2), function_row.rs, visual.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with worker.rs, transport.rs, bolt.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with profiles.rs, hook.rs, assets.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether volatile projects sit underneath others that depend on them (so their churn ripples upward), and whether project dependencies form cycles. A widely-depended-on but stable shared/kernel project is healthy, not penalised.

Method: Dependency cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, plus Martin instability (afferent/efferent) per project. Exhaustive over the reference graph, deterministic.

Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: afferent/efferent coupling + cycles computed over every production type — the population is all types, not a name convention.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

21 production modules (Cargo), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 5 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 18 of the 21 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, or are not Gradle/Maven modules or Cargo crates).

Off the main sequence: openlogi-assets · ×5

What to do

Resolve the 5 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D7 · Architectural Integrity6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the code respects its intended layering / architecture rules.

Method: Enforcement rung (Prevented/Verified/Documented) per checkable ADR via Roslyn, plus dependency cycles via the engine shared with D5/AX3. Deterministic, exact.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

No mechanizable ADR was identified, so enforcement is not measured. Dependency cycles not checked (no project-reference graph; where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there).

What to do

Enforce Architectural Integrity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d7_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.

Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1879 test methods: 1862 unit, 17 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 1879 `#[test]` function(s) across 308 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 2 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D11 · Test Reliability10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests pass reliably, with no flakiness.

Method: Suite re-run N times within tiered wall-clock budgets (unit to e2e); tests failing non-deterministically across runs flagged; guarded tests retried when #if guards detected.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 flaky across 1 measured tier(s). Rust (repository root, 308 test files): measured (0 flaky).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d11_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · Secret Scanning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.

Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.8 / 10Stronggated by 28 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.

Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Top hotspots: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs (28×44=1232); crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs (60×19=1140); crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs (22×31=682) Repeated repair below the complexity floor: crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs (7 of 9 changes were fixes); crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs (5 of 8 changes were fixes); crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/diag/lighting.rs (3 of 5 changes were fixes)

Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs · ×23crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs:60

Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs · ×5crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs:489

What to do

Resolve the 23 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with pairing.rs (2), inventory.rs (2), binding_editor.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (23 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 Repeated repair finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with thumbwheel.rs (2), capture_windows.rs, lighting.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.

Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 deducted task-comment markers across 143928 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic doc sample (READMEs plus first 25 architecture docs), with two-pass stability filtering. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Strong / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

OpenLogi's documentation is clear and complete for its repository-level root README, fixtures/README, xtask/README, crates/openlogi-hid/README, crates/openlogi-hidpp/README, and docs/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md. The root README gives an overview (a Rust-native HID++ alternative to Logitech Options+, written in Rust), installation, usage, a star/watch link, and a license statement; the fixtures/README documents fixture directories with contribution guidance; xtask/README is a development-task entry point with commands, bundle identity, and maintenance rules; crates/openlogi-hid/README describes the crate's role as an HID++ layer over async-hid and openlogi-hidpp; crates/openlogi-hidpp/README covers feature coverage and protocol-level support; docs/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is a full Contributor Covenant code of conduct. The architecture/design documentation (decision log) is clipped, so its decisions are present but not flagged as missing. OpenLogi's documentation is clear and complete for a native Rust alternative to Logitech Options+, covering the README (overview, development workflow, macOS/Linux toolchain, building from source with Nix/devenv, device access), an architecture/development doc on mock-device testing (why multi-mock, fixture schema status, HID++ correlation rules), and four language translations (German, French, Japanese, Russian) that each carry the full project overview, prerequisites, installation, usage, and development guidance. The README files alone are sufficient for a repository-level overview; the translation docs serve as cross-language consistency anchors. The OpenLogi documentation is strong: the READMEs are well written for their directories (SECURITY.md for security policy and vulnerability reporting; USAGE.md for CLI usage examples), with a clear overview of each document's scope. The architecture/design docs are also present but not shown in this summary. Security covers supported versions, private-reporting channels, response expectations, and disclosure best practices; the CLI Usage section gives concrete commands with default behavior (no subcommand) and explains asset-synchronization choices.

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.9/10. — OpenLogi's documentation is clear and complete for its repository-level root README, fixtures/README, xtask/README, crates/openlogi-hid/README, crates/openlogi-hidpp/README, and docs/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md. The root README gives an overview (a Rust-native HID++ alternative to Logitech Options+, written in Rust), installation, usage, a star/watch link, and a license statement; the fixtures/README documents fixture directories with contribution guidance; xtask/README is a development-task entry point with commands, bundle identity, and maintenance rules; crates/openlogi-hid/README describes the crate's role as an HID++ layer over async-hid and openlogi-hidpp; crates/openlogi-hidpp/README covers feature coverage and protocol-level support; docs/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is a full Contributor Covenant code of conduct. The architecture/design documentation (decision log) is clipped, so its decisions are present but not flagged as missing. OpenLogi's documentation is clear and complete for a native Rust alternative to Logitech Options+, covering the README (overview, development workflow, macOS/Linux toolchain, building from source with Nix/devenv, device access), an architecture/development doc on mock-device testing (why multi-mock, fixture schema status, HID++ correlation rules), and four language translations (German, French, Japanese, Russian) that each carry the full project overview, prerequisites, installation, usage, and development guidance. The README files alone are sufficient for a repository-level overview; the translation docs serve as cross-language consistency anchors. The OpenLogi documentation is strong: the READMEs are well written for their directories (SECURITY.md for security policy and vulnerability reporting; USAGE.md for CLI usage examples), with a clear overview of each document's scope. The architecture/design docs are also present but not shown in this summary. Security covers supported versions, private-reporting channels, response expectations, and disclosure best practices; the CLI Usage section gives concrete commands with default behavior (no subcommand) and explains asset-synchronization choices.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D20 · ADR QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether architecture decisions are recorded well (context, decision, consequences).

Method: Per-ADR judgment by language model at low temperature with two-pass stability; confidence is share of ADRs evaluated; enforcement-field presence detected deterministically. Advisory.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Evaluated 1 ADR(s) individually; mean quality 9.0/10 (consistently complete and clear). 0 flagged with a specific gap.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d20_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyAdequate◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the internal API surface is consistent and coherent.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature over a sample of the public API surface (IsPackable or .Contracts types). Sampled, advisory; confidence discounted by model uncertainty.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Adequate / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

5 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 730 exposed types.

Ambiguous duplication: Two methods with nearly identical names suggest different return types or behaviors (e.g., parsed vs raw bytes), but the signatures are identical (`Result`). Without documentation, it is unclear if one is deprecated, if they return different types, or if one is a mistake. · ×2

Duplicate intent across types: Both `Config` and `ConfigFile` expose `load_or_default`. It is unclear if `ConfigFile` is a lower-level utility and `Config` is the high-level facade, or if they are redundant entry points for the same operation. · ×2

Inconsistent naming for save operations: `save_atomic` implies a specific implementation detail (atomicity) rather than a destination, while `save_to_path` is explicit. If `save_atomic` saves to the default path, it should be named `save()` or `save_default()`.

What to do

Resolve the 2 Ambiguous duplication finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicate intent across types finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for save operations finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d22_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion7.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether each project is a focused, coherent unit rather than an oversized grab-bag.

Method: Project size overshoot penalties (LoC / public-type count / namespace count, 2-of-3 flag) weighted by log magnitude. Exhaustive across projects, deterministic, LLM-independent.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 of 21 build units (Cargo) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split crates/openlogi-desktop

What to do

Resolve the 1 Split crates/openlogi-desktop finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.

Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.

Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

88 finding(s): 0 critical, 88 high, 0 medium, 0 low. 84 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 9 file(s) — `crates/openlogi-agent/src/lifecycle.rs` (line 205, line 206, line 208), `crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_macos.rs` (line 65, line 71, line 73, …), `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/preview.rs` (line 172, line 197), `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/runtime.rs` (line 52), `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/camera.rs` (line 28), … (+4 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 3 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 84 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (86 issue-level, 2 of them charged here).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir/Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.

Method: Dependency-CVE scan across every ecosystem the repository declares, scored ONCE. Three sources are unioned and deduplicated by advisory identity (rule id + alias closure, CVE<->GHSA) scoped to package+version, keeping the worst severity: `osv-scanner --recursive` over osv.dev for Dart pub, Elixir/Hex, Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, npm, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift; `trivy fs --scanners vuln` for npm lockfiles; and `dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitive` for NuGet (with per-advisory collapse of the project x target-framework fan-out), plus a DECLARED-dependency arm that resolves a published gem's gemspec against rubygems.org where no Gemfile.lock is committed. `SeverityScore(c,h,m,l, normalizer 8.0)`. NotApplicable only when NO ecosystem is readable; if any applicable ecosystem could not be scanned the findings are REPORTED and the score is withheld. Supersedes the npm and OSV arms, retired 2026-09-05.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

10 finding(s): 0 critical, 0 high, 10 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 6 Medium advisory (unmaintained) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Medium advisory (unsound) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Medium vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.

Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 472 of the 578 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling9.9 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.

Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.

Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: binding_editor.rs↔view.rs 60%; function_row.rs↔view.rs 53%; route.rs↔pairing.rs 53%

Change coupling: binding_editor.rs ↔ view.rs · ×4crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs

What to do

Resolve the 4 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with binding_editor.rs, function_row.rs, route.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing2.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the build pipeline provides supply-chain integrity — generated provenance/attestation, signed artifacts (cosign/sigstore), an SBOM, and pinned build actions. Presence of the configuration, not a runtime guarantee.

Method: Supply-chain provenance/signing read deterministically from CI/build config (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines, Jenkinsfile, .circleci) + the release surface: four signals — generated provenance/attestation (SLSA/in-toto/actions-attest), artifact signing (cosign/sigstore/gitsign), an SBOM (syft/sbom-action/*.spdx.json/*.cdx.json), and SHA-pinned build actions — scored 10·present/denom. NotApplicable without a build pipeline. Detects configuration presence, not runtime enforcement.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d36_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.

Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

A vulnerability-disclosure policy (docs/SECURITY.md) is published with a reporting contact.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d37_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D43 · Malicious Dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.

Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No dependency in any ecosystem this repository declares is published as malicious.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D44 · Platform End-of-Life10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still ships security patches for the platform this repository RUNS ON — the runtime it pins and the framework majors its own constraints hold it to. Separate from D12 because the question differs: a current Django on an end-of-life Python is perfectly up to date and completely unsupported, and the fix is a migration rather than a version bump. What the repository says it merely SUPPORTS is never charged.

Method: End-of-life PLATFORM read from the repository's own declarations and graded against a FROZEN, dated table of vendor support dates — no network, no feed, no API, so this dimension answers identically inside a closed scan fence. Two subjects: a RUNTIME the project pins (a single or all-end-of-life TargetFramework, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a requires-python CAP) and a FRAMEWORK major a dependency constraint cannot move off (a caret, tilde or exact version; `vue@^2.7.16` pins Vue 2). A FLOOR is deliberately never charged — `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what a package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on — and a multi-target project is charged only when EVERY target is out of support. Runtime 4.0/product capped 8.0, framework 1.5 capped 4.5. The table is safe to freeze because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false: it loses recall as it ages, never precision, and a test asserts every entry predates the freeze date. Disjoint from D31 (a container image's OS layer) and D29 (the toolchain a CI workflow installs). Abstains when the repository declares no platform this pass reads — never scores it clean.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 2 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

R = React/JS · M = Maturity · P = Readiness.

AX10 · Code composition9.7 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.

Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.

Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.

What to do

The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX3 · Project dependency cycles10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).

Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX5 · Architecture & structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.

Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX7 · Slice cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether feature slices stay independent (no direct cross-slice references) — the discipline that makes vertical-slice architecture pay off.

Method: Roslyn scan (vertical-slice gated): feature slices resolved from namespaces (.Features.*, .Slices.*) or project names; cross-slice type references detected. Deterministic, traceable.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX9 · CQS / query purity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether read (query) handlers stay side-effect-free — a query that writes persistent state or raises events breaks CQS and makes reads unsafe to retry, cache, or route to a read replica.

Method: Roslyn scan: CQRS handlers classified query-vs-command by interface (IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler<TQuery,TResult>) and name convention (*Query/Get*/Find* vs *Command); each query handler's body checked for persistent-state writes (SaveChanges/repository Add-Update) or event publishes by resolved invocation. Deterministic, type-level, exhaustive over the detected handlers.

Coverage: Population: CQRS handlers identified by IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler interface + *Query/Get*/Find*/*Command NAME convention; query purity then checked exhaustively within that set — a query handler using neither convention is invisible, and mutation is a resolved persistence/publish CALL, not full dataflow.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES1 · Fold determinism10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether the recovery-replay fold is deterministic — state derived purely from each event's own fields, no clock/random/IO on the replay path.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan (event-sourcing gated): Apply/When folds checked for forbidden tokens (DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random, IO), stripped of comments/strings. Deterministic, hard fact per fold.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES2 · Immutable events10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether domain events stay immutable (private fields, set once) rather than carrying mutable state.

Method: Roslyn scan (event-sourcing gated): persisted events checked for public setters; immutability verified per property/field. Deterministic, hard fact.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)6.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.

Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.

What to do

Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 19 of 22 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.7 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.

Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.

1 ADR-shaped document(s) detected by content — `docs/DECISIONS.md`. They are not under a conventional ADR folder (docs/adr/) and are not named NNNN-title.md, and this check found them by their decision signature rather than by where they live — so a reader who does not already know these paths has no route to them. Detected by content signature only: records kept outside the repository, or written without a Status/Decision/Consequences shape, are not visible to this check and are not counted here.

What to do

Move ADRs under docs/adr/ (or docs/adrs/) and name them NNNN-title.md so they're easy to find.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M3 · Folder & project structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.

Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy9.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P1 · CI/CD gates10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.

Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability6.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: structured-logging frameworks (Serilog, NLog), OpenTelemetry, and health-check endpoint patterns. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Only 14/16 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `crates/openlogi`, `xtask`.

What to do

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).

Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.

What to do

Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.

Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.

What to do

The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are traceable — a maintained changelog and explicit version stamping.

Method: Filesystem scan: changelog file presence and version tags in csproj or git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Reference — by lens

The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	91%	Exemplary	Solid.
Architecture	92%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	71%	Strong	Solid.
Readiness	66%	Strong	Largest drag on the score — prioritise here.
Security	79%	Adequate — gated by D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event Sourcing	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Solid.

Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.

C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 75 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.

AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX2 Stateful singletons — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX4 Dependency direction — not applicable to a vertical-slice architecture (the inward-dependency rule is for layered/clean styles)
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~12650 lines of test source are present (.rs) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 57 direct Cargo declaration(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs crates.io, which could not be reached on this run, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — Not scored — this repository's 994 shipped crate(s) were read from its REDACTED, but crates.io could not be asked for the licence of 27 of them (HTTP 429 Unknown Error), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Aggregate roots were found in only one source directory (openlogi-device), which is a layered codebase, not two contexts. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — none of 1 ADRs are conformance-checkable — unverifiable.
D27 Navigability — symbol resolution incomplete — too few calls resolved to assess navigability
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — D6 reads a CS/VB/GO/SCALA/SWIFT/DART/JAVA/PY/KT/TS/TSX/MTS/CTS/JS/JSX/MJS/CJS/PHP class graph only — this repository's production source is .rs, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (3 signals for this style, 3 needed — the count is met but a required primary signal is absent): 1 aggregate root(s) (types guarding their own state behind command methods — this language has no AggregateRoot base to inherit); 96 value object(s); 14 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one; no aggregate is declared and no domain structure surrounds the state-guarding types: not claimed as DDD
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P10 Library API & versioning — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript, Rust source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
PF2 Allocation hygiene — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X10 Duplicated predicate — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X7 Silent fallback defaults — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.

Critical — 88 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 61 more in this group — see findings.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

Serious — 179 finding(s)

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×23

Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs:60 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs changed 28 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 44 in openlogi_desktop::features::binding_editor::action_icon_path at line 60. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs:199 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs changed 60 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 19 in AppView::new at line 199. 7 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 53 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:397 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs changed 22 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 31 in openlogi_inject::inject::macos::hid_usage_to_macos at line 397. 5 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 17 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/ipc.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/ipc.rs:162 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/ipc.rs changed 40 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in openlogi_desktop::services::ipc::observe_loop at line 162. 7 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 33 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/ipc.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs:357 — crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs changed 19 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in openlogi_device::pairing::drive at line 357. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 16 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs:245 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs changed 25 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in KeyboardManagerState::reconcile at line 245. 8 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 17 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action.rs crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action.rs:306 — crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 53 in Action::label at line 306. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 4 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/action.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/inventory.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/inventory.rs:273 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/inventory.rs changed 19 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in AppState::adopt_transient_records at line 273. 4 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 15 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/inventory.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls.rs:194 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls.rs changed 20 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in CameraControlsPanel::ensure_built at line 194. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 17 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs:43 — crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs changed 16 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 18 in openlogi_device::channel::route::open_route_channel at line 43. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 15 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/inventory.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/inventory.rs:426 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/inventory.rs changed 15 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in InventoryWorker::next_trigger at line 426. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/inventory.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs:92 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs changed 13 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in ActionExecutor::dispatch_to at line 92. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/linux.rs crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/linux.rs:72 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/linux.rs changed 12 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in openlogi_inject::inject::linux::combo at line 72. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/linux.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs:431 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs changed 9 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 21 in openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage at line 431. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs.rs xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs.rs:108 — xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs.rs changed 11 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in Job::spec at line 108. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/windows.rs crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/windows.rs:86 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/windows.rs changed 10 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in openlogi_inject::inject::windows::combo at line 86. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/windows.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/key_combo.rs crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/key_combo.rs:34 — crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/key_combo.rs changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 31 in KeyboardUsage::label at line 34. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/key_combo.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs/steps.rs xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs/steps.rs:138 — xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs/steps.rs changed 10 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in xtask::commands::ci::jobs::steps::plan at line 138. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- xtask/src/commands/ci/jobs/steps.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs:105 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs changed 7 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 19 in openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native at line 105. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/cache.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/cache.rs:134 — crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/cache.rs changed 8 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in openlogi_device::inventory::cache::probe_or_reuse at line 134. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/cache.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/pairing.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/pairing.rs:125 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/pairing.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in openlogi_agent_core::watchers::pairing::run_with at line 125. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/pairing.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs:98 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in openlogi_desktop::services::assets::glow::compute_glow_geometry at line 98. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture/dispatch.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture/dispatch.rs:140 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture/dispatch.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in InputDispatcher::dispatch at line 140. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture/dispatch.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×8

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs:572 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs:572-577 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs:632-637 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/lighting/visual.rs:34 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/lighting/visual.rs:34-39 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/lighting/visual.rs:58-63 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs:164 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs:164-169 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs:243-248 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/add_device.rs:198 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/add_device.rs:198-203 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/update_consent.rs:71-76 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows.rs:155 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows.rs:155-160 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/main_window.rs:62-68 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:103 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:103-108 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:138-143 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:232 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:232-237 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:333-338 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs:141 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs:141-146 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/settings.rs:197-202 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_device · ×7

openlogi_device::pairing::drive (cognitive 47) crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs:357 — openlogi_device::pairing::drive has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (34 pts), match/switch 4 (12 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 33). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_device::session::capture::monitor (cognitive 41) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/capture.rs:294 — openlogi_device::session::capture::monitor has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (30 pts), match/switch 4 (10 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 26). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into (cognitive 41) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/arm.rs:161 — openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (24 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 7, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_device::inventory::cache::probe_or_reuse (cognitive 30) crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/cache.rs:134 — openlogi_device::inventory::cache::probe_or_reuse has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (21 pts), match/switch 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
openlogi_device::channel::route::open_route_channel (cognitive 30) crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs:43 — openlogi_device::channel::route::open_route_channel has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (23 pts), boolean chains 4, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_device::inventory::features::probe_features (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/features.rs:199 — openlogi_device::inventory::features::probe_features has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 6 (10 pts), if/else 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
openlogi_device::session::host_switch::monitor_host_switch (cognitive 17) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/host_switch.rs:253 — openlogi_device::session::host_switch::monitor_host_switch has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (8 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_agent_core · ×6

openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native (cognitive 50) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs:105 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (36 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), match/switch 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 33). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_agent_core::watchers::pairing::run_with (cognitive 34) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/pairing.rs:125 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::pairing::run_with has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (17 pts), if/else 4 (9 pts), loops 4 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 21). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage (cognitive 32) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs:431 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (23 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_agent_core::runtime::hook::handle_button (cognitive 27) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/hook.rs:240 — openlogi_agent_core::runtime::hook::handle_button has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (26 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_agent_core::watchers::capture_manager::run (cognitive 23) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/capture_manager.rs:94 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::capture_manager::run has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (13 pts), match/switch 4 (9 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_agent_core::runtime::scroll::worker::run_worker (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/scroll/worker.rs:394 — openlogi_agent_core::runtime::scroll::worker::run_worker has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (8 pts), if/else 3 (7 pts), loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×6

FileTooLong: keyboard/function_row.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs — FileTooLong — 638 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 138 over it, 1.28× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: app/detail.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/detail.rs — FileTooLong — 637 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 137 over it, 1.27× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: bin/mock_agent.rs crates/openlogi-agent/src/bin/mock_agent.rs — FileTooLong — 570 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 70 over it, 1.14× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/orchestrator.rs crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator.rs — FileTooLong — 565 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 82% of them inside a single declaration: Orchestrator (2 blocks, 170-981). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 65 over it, 1.13× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: mouse/view.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs — FileTooLong — 541 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 41 over it, 1.08× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: mouse/inspector.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs — FileTooLong — 540 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 40 over it, 1.08× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unmaintained) · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · openlogi_device · ×5

openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into (cyclomatic 23) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/arm.rs:161 — openlogi_device::session::gesture::arm::arm_controls_into has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
openlogi_device::pairing::drive (cyclomatic 23) crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs:357 — openlogi_device::pairing::drive has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
openlogi_device::session::capture::monitor (cyclomatic 22) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/capture.rs:294 — openlogi_device::session::capture::monitor has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
openlogi_device::channel::route::open_route_channel (cyclomatic 18) crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs:43 — openlogi_device::channel::route::open_route_channel has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
openlogi_device::inventory::cache::probe_or_reuse (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/cache.rs:134 — openlogi_device::inventory::cache::probe_or_reuse has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair · ×5

Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs:489 — crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs changed 9 times in last 90 days and 7 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 10 (its worst body is openlogi_camera::capture_windows::activate_source at line 489), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(camera): require a stored frame before reporting startup”; “fix(camera): refuse a camera another application is streaming”; “fix: resolve remaining state-machine audit findings (#1083)”; “fix(camera): finish the 1.98 chunks_exact sweep in the platform backends”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_windows.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs:52 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs changed 8 times in last 90 days and 5 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 13 (its worst body is ThumbwheelPreset::pair at line 52), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(gui): correct thumb-wheel volume preset labels (#1436)”; “fix(hid): normalize thumbwheel direction per device (#1158)”; “fix(thumbwheel): scale remapped vertical scrolling (#925)”; “fix(gui): restore full-phrase thumb-wheel preset labels (#913)”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/thumbwheel.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/diag/lighting.rs crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/diag/lighting.rs:26 — crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/diag/lighting.rs changed 5 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 4 (its worst body is LightingMethod::from at line 26), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(cli): select rgb devices through receiver routes”; “fix(hid): drive 0x2202 DPI and 0x8081 lighting, not just their predecessors (#629)”; “fix(core,gui,agent,cli): validate the lighting color once as a typed Rgb”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/diag/lighting.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-device/src/thumbwheel.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/thumbwheel.rs:90 — crates/openlogi-device/src/thumbwheel.rs changed 5 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 4 (its worst body is RotationStatus::from_byte at line 90), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(hid): normalize thumbwheel direction per device (#1158)”; “fix(agent): preserve fractional thumbwheel distance”; “fix(thumbwheel): stop the tap firing App Exposé, and scroll by the wheel's native amount (#857)”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-device/src/thumbwheel.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs:286 — crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 7 (its worst body is openlogi_core::config::file::reject_obsolete_fields at line 286), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(hid): normalize thumbwheel direction per device (#1158)”; “fix: resolve remaining state-machine audit findings (#1083)”; “fix(core,gui,agent): key device settings by identity, not by transport (#876)”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:06:51 +08:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:06:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×5

Off the main sequence: openlogi-assets — openlogi-assets: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: openlogi-device-registry — openlogi-device-registry: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 4 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: openlogi-core — openlogi-core: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.07, distance 0.93 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 14 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: openlogi-fixture — openlogi-fixture: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.20, distance 0.80 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 4 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: openlogi-camera — openlogi-camera: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.25, distance 0.75 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 3 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · openlogi_agent_core · ×4

openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage (cyclomatic 21) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs:431 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::host_switch::manage has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native (cyclomatic 19) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/foreground_app.rs:105 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::foreground_app::spawn_native has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
openlogi_agent_core::watchers::capture_manager::run (cyclomatic 17) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/capture_manager.rs:94 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::capture_manager::run has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
openlogi_agent_core::watchers::pairing::run_with (cyclomatic 17) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/pairing.rs:125 — openlogi_agent_core::watchers::pairing::run_with has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×4

Change coupling: binding_editor.rs ↔ view.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs — `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/binding_editor.rs` and `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs` change together 60% of the time (18 of the 30 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 18 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `32ce1e8c` refactor(gui): clean up render paths and element ids (#926) (at that commit the file was still `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/picker.rs`); `279d7caf` feat(gui): make custom controls keyboard-operable (#916) (at that commit the file was still `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/picker.rs`); `ed4f7b03` fix(gui): apply semantic colors to custom controls (at that commit the file was still `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/picker.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: function_row.rs ↔ view.rs crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs — `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs` and `crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs` change together 53% of the time (8 of the 15 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `7f0bb498` docs(gui): mend the desktop crate's intra-doc links; `46a8a011` refactor(gui): import the binding-editor chrome from where it lives; `3fb347c3` refactor(gui): give device panels one relevance filter — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: route.rs ↔ pairing.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs — `crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs` and `crates/openlogi-device/src/pairing.rs` change together 53% of the time (9 of the 17 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `6a8a8f82` refactor(device): rename RECEIVER_REGISTER_WAIT to RECEIVER_REGISTER_…; `491ad2f9` fix(hid): every receiver register caller takes the node's register phase; `3878f033` refactor(hid): centralize device identities (#831) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: tests.rs ↔ keyboard.rs crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/tests.rs — `crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/tests.rs` and `crates/openlogi-device/src/session/keyboard.rs` change together 50% of the time (9 of the 18 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `f412a1a2` refactor(device): share one pending-restore token between capture and…; `15d2656a` refactor(device): run gesture and keyboard capture through one sessio…; `2b139420` refactor(device): hand a capture session its host handles as CaptureHost — run `git show` on any of them.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_hook · ×3

openlogi_hook::linux::device_thread (cognitive 32) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux.rs:437 — openlogi_hook::linux::device_thread has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (18 pts), match/switch 3 (10 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_hook::linux::pointer::context_on_connection (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux/pointer.rs:47 — openlogi_hook::linux::pointer::context_on_connection has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_hook::linux::foreground::stop::poll_source_or_stop (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux/foreground/stop.rs:156 — openlogi_hook::linux::foreground::stop::poll_source_or_stop has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_overlay · ×3

openlogi_overlay::ipc::send_commands_with (cognitive 28) crates/openlogi-overlay/src/ipc.rs:259 — openlogi_overlay::ipc::send_commands_with has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (13 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), match/switch 2 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_overlay::ipc::observe_invocations (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-overlay/src/ipc.rs:170 — openlogi_overlay::ipc::observe_invocations has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (15 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_overlay::main (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-overlay/src/main.rs:35 — openlogi_overlay::main has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (8 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AppState · ×3

AppState::finish_light_command (cognitive 26) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:308 — AppState::finish_light_command has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (23 pts), loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
AppState::adopt_transient_records (cognitive 24) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/inventory.rs:273 — AppState::adopt_transient_records has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (14 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
AppState::commit_light (cognitive 20) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:464 — AppState::commit_light has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_desktop · ×3

openlogi_desktop::services::assets::glow::compute_glow_geometry (cognitive 26) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs:98 — openlogi_desktop::services::assets::glow::compute_glow_geometry has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 7 (12 pts), if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
openlogi_desktop::features::camera::controls::rows::control_row (cognitive 22) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls/rows.rs:81 — openlogi_desktop::features::camera::controls::rows::control_row has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (18 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
openlogi_desktop::services::ipc::observe_loop (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/ipc.rs:162 — openlogi_desktop::services::ipc::observe_loop has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), match/switch 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_camera · ×3

openlogi_camera::uvc_macos::scan_descriptors (cognitive 22) crates/openlogi-camera/src/uvc_macos.rs:587 — openlogi_camera::uvc_macos::scan_descriptors has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), boolean chains 5, match/switch 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_camera::linux::max_format (cognitive 17) crates/openlogi-camera/src/linux.rs:161 — openlogi_camera::linux::max_format has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_camera::capture_macos::open_session (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-camera/src/capture_macos.rs:336 — openlogi_camera::capture_macos::open_session has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (16 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×3

TooManyMethods: AppState crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state.rs:161 — TooManyMethods — 178 methods, declared across 14 files: src/state.rs (25), state/settings.rs (25), state/bindings.rs (23), state/light.rs (17), +10 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 148 over it, 5.93× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Config crates/openlogi-core/src/config.rs:102 — TooManyMethods — 67 methods, declared across 7 files: config/per_device.rs (39), config/per_app.rs (6), src/config.rs (5), config/gestures.rs (5), +3 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 37 over it, 2.23× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Orchestrator crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator.rs:170 — TooManyMethods — 33 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 3 over it, 1.10× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/button/worker.rs:145 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/button/worker.rs:145-154 | crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime/button/worker.rs:180-189 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-hid/src/transport.rs:486 — crates/openlogi-hid/src/transport.rs:486-495 | crates/openlogi-hid/src/transport.rs:507-516 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/probe/bolt.rs:218 — crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/probe/bolt.rs:218-227 | crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory/probe/unifying.rs:338-347 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:92 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:92-98 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:145-151 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-hook/src/windows/hook.rs:387 — crates/openlogi-hook/src/windows/hook.rs:387-393 | crates/openlogi-hook/src/windows/hook.rs:528-534 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/settings/assets.rs:157 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/settings/assets.rs:157-163 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/windows/settings/language.rs:72-80 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:534 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:534-538 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:620-624 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:193 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:193-199 | crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:225-229 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:218 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:218-222 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app/home/views.rs:248-252 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · openlogi_core · ×2

openlogi_core::config::identity::fold (cyclomatic 37) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/identity.rs:247 — openlogi_core::config::identity::fold has cyclomatic complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
openlogi_core::binding::key_combo::parse_key (cyclomatic 33) crates/openlogi-core/src/binding/key_combo.rs:277 — openlogi_core::binding::key_combo::parse_key has cyclomatic complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · openlogi_desktop · ×2

openlogi_desktop::services::assets::glow::compute_glow_geometry (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/assets/glow.rs:98 — openlogi_desktop::services::assets::glow::compute_glow_geometry has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
openlogi_desktop::services::ipc::observe_loop (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/services/ipc.rs:162 — openlogi_desktop::services::ipc::observe_loop has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_core · ×2

openlogi_core::config::identity::fold_maps (cognitive 28) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/identity.rs:374 — openlogi_core::config::identity::fold_maps has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (24 pts), loops 4 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
openlogi_core::config::identity::fold (cognitive 26) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/identity.rs:247 — openlogi_core::config::identity::fold has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10, match/switch 10, boolean chains 5, loops 1. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CameraControlsPanel · ×2

CameraControlsPanel::apply_profile (cognitive 25) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls.rs:505 — CameraControlsPanel::apply_profile has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
CameraControlsPanel::ensure_built (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/camera/controls.rs:194 — CameraControlsPanel::ensure_built has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (6 pts), loops 4, match/switch 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Config · ×2

Config::migrate_owner_locked_gestures (cognitive 24) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/migrate.rs:77 — Config::migrate_owner_locked_gestures has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (15 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Config::migrate_thumbwheel_native_direction (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/migrate.rs:224 — Config::migrate_thumbwheel_native_direction has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · KeyboardManagerState · ×2

KeyboardManagerState::reconcile (cognitive 22) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs:245 — KeyboardManagerState::reconcile has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (19 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
KeyboardManagerState::handle_session_event (cognitive 17) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs:329 — KeyboardManagerState::handle_session_event has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · openlogi_cli · ×2

openlogi_cli::cmd::diag::features::run (cognitive 21) crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/diag/features.rs:16 — openlogi_cli::cmd::diag::features::run has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 4 (11 pts), match/switch 3 (9 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
openlogi_cli::cmd::assets::sync::run (cognitive 17) crates/openlogi-cli/src/cmd/assets/sync.rs:67 — openlogi_cli::cmd::assets::sync::run has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (8 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · GestureManagerState · ×2

GestureManagerState::reconcile (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture.rs:333 — GestureManagerState::reconcile has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), loops 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
GestureManagerState::handle_session_event (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture.rs:416 — GestureManagerState::handle_session_event has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 6). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Ambiguous duplication · ×2

Ambiguous duplication: Two methods with nearly identical names suggest different return types or behaviors (e.g., parsed vs raw bytes), but the signatures are identical (`Result`). Without documentation, it is unclear if one is deprecated, if they return different types, or if one is a mistake. — Rename to `fetch_index_parsed()` and `fetch_index_raw()` or remove the redundant method if one is unused. (signatures: AssetClient.fetch_index(): Result | AssetClient.fetch_index_raw(): Result)
Ambiguous duplication: `latest_frame` and `take_frame` likely differ in semantics (e.g., non-blocking peek vs. blocking/consuming), but the identical signatures and similar naming create confusion about which to use for non-blocking reads. — Rename `latest_frame` to `peek_frame` or `current_frame` to clearly distinguish it from `take_frame`. (signatures: CameraStream.latest_frame(): Frame | CameraStream.take_frame(): Frame)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate intent across types · ×2

Duplicate intent across types: Both `Config` and `ConfigFile` expose `load_or_default`. It is unclear if `ConfigFile` is a lower-level utility and `Config` is the high-level facade, or if they are redundant entry points for the same operation. — Ensure `ConfigFile` is private or internal, or rename `ConfigFile.load_or_default` to `load_or_default_file` to indicate it operates on the file structure rather than the domain object. (signatures: Config.load_or_default(): Result | ConfigFile.load_or_default(): Result)
Duplicate intent across types: Same as above, `load_from_path` exists on both `Config` and `ConfigFile` with identical signatures. — Consolidate loading logic into one type or clearly separate responsibilities (e.g., `ConfigFile` for I/O, `Config` for domain logic). (signatures: Config.load_from_path(path: Path): Result | ConfigFile.load_from_path(path: Path): Result)

D3 · God Classes · TooManyFunctions · ×2

TooManyFunctions: openlogi_hid::host crates/openlogi-hid/src/host.rs:37 — TooManyFunctions — 32 free functions. The bar is 30 free functions; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: openlogi_inject::inject::linux crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/linux.rs:35 — TooManyFunctions — 31 free functions. The bar is 30 free functions; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unsound) · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:513 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:513-526 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/light.rs:589-602 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:124 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:124-137 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:179-192 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs:691 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view.rs:691-699 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/view/labels.rs:182-190 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs:405 — crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs:405-413 | crates/openlogi-core/src/config/file.rs:417-425 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CaptureAccum · ×1

CaptureAccum::on_event (cyclomatic 21) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/accum.rs:104 — CaptureAccum::on_event has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AppView · ×1

AppView::new (cyclomatic 19) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs:199 — AppView::new has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · InventoryWorker · ×1

InventoryWorker::next_trigger (cyclomatic 17) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/inventory.rs:426 — InventoryWorker::next_trigger has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · KeyboardManagerState · ×1

KeyboardManagerState::reconcile (cyclomatic 17) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/keyboard.rs:245 — KeyboardManagerState::reconcile has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ReceiverSlots · ×1

ReceiverSlots::validate (cyclomatic 17) crates/openlogi-device/src/replay/slots.rs:48 — ReceiverSlots::validate has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ActionExecutor · ×1

ActionExecutor::dispatch_to (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs:92 — ActionExecutor::dispatch_to has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AppState · ×1

AppState::adopt_transient_records (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/inventory.rs:273 — AppState::adopt_transient_records has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Accumulator · ×1

Accumulator::run (cyclomatic 16) crates/openlogi-hid/src/recording/accumulator.rs:64 — Accumulator::run has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CaptureAccum · ×1

CaptureAccum::on_event (cognitive 35) crates/openlogi-device/src/session/gesture/accum.rs:104 — CaptureAccum::on_event has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 3 (6 pts), match/switch 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 15). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · InventoryWorker · ×1

InventoryWorker::next_trigger (cognitive 28) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/inventory.rs:426 — InventoryWorker::next_trigger has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), match/switch 4 (10 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ActionExecutor · ×1

ActionExecutor::dispatch_to (cognitive 23) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/runtime.rs:92 — ActionExecutor::dispatch_to has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (19 pts), match/switch 3 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · InputDispatcher · ×1

InputDispatcher::dispatch (cognitive 23) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/gesture/dispatch.rs:140 — InputDispatcher::dispatch has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (21 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Accumulator · ×1

Accumulator::run (cognitive 21) crates/openlogi-hid/src/recording/accumulator.rs:64 — Accumulator::run has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (18 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HostSwitchManagerState · ×1

HostSwitchManagerState::reconcile_recoveries (cognitive 20) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/watchers/host_switch.rs:269 — HostSwitchManagerState::reconcile_recoveries has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AppView · ×1

AppView::render_content (cognitive 20) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs:477 — AppView::render_content has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ReceiverSlots · ×1

ReceiverSlots::validate (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-device/src/replay/slots.rs:48 — ReceiverSlots::validate has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (14 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WlrForeignToplevelSource · ×1

WlrForeignToplevelSource::observe (cognitive 18) crates/openlogi-hook/src/linux/foreground/wlr_foreign_toplevel.rs:494 — WlrForeignToplevelSource::observe has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (15 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Enumerator · ×1

Enumerator::enumerate_reporting_completeness (cognitive 17) crates/openlogi-device/src/inventory.rs:516 — Enumerator::enumerate_reporting_completeness has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 3, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · xtask · ×1

xtask::commands::macos::dev_bundle::processes::reap_leftovers (cognitive 17) xtask/src/commands/macos/dev_bundle/processes.rs:35 — xtask::commands::macos::dev_bundle::processes::reap_leftovers has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (13 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 2 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RingHapticPlayer · ×1

RingHapticPlayer::spawn (cognitive 16) crates/openlogi-agent/src/server.rs:498 — RingHapticPlayer::spawn has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming for save operations · ×1

Inconsistent naming for save operations: `save_atomic` implies a specific implementation detail (atomicity) rather than a destination, while `save_to_path` is explicit. If `save_atomic` saves to the default path, it should be named `save()` or `save_default()`. — Rename `save_atomic` to `save()` (if it saves to the configured path) or `save_atomic_to_default()` to match the explicit naming of `save_to_path`. (signatures: Config.save_atomic(): Result | Config.save_to_path(path: Path): Result)

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×1

ClassTooLong: Orchestrator crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator.rs:170 — ClassTooLong — 461 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 33 methods, 2 blocks, lines 170-981. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.15× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×1

MethodTooLong: AppView.render_content crates/openlogi-desktop/src/app.rs:477 — MethodTooLong — render_content runs 110 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 10 over it, 1.10× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (34 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member pair (34 shared lines) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:91 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:91-137 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:144-192 — These two members are variants of one another: 34 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) · ×1

Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject.rs:519 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject.rs:519-553 | crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:397-439 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19–20 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (19–20 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-agent/src/server.rs:599 — crates/openlogi-agent/src/bin/mock_agent.rs:240-259 | crates/openlogi-agent/src/server.rs:599-617 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–16 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–16 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator/devices.rs:59 — crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator/devices.rs:59-74 | crates/openlogi-agent-core/src/orchestrator/devices.rs:92-102 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs:70 — crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs:70-83 | crates/openlogi-device/src/channel/route.rs:86-100 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–14 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–14 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs:687 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/keyboard/function_row.rs:687-697 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/leader_lines.rs:118-131 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:104 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:104-116 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/profiles.rs:159-171 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (10–12 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/devices.rs:195 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/devices.rs:195-206 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/state/devices.rs:359-368 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–12 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:88 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:88-99 | crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/windows.rs:64-74 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs:244 — crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs:244-253 | crates/openlogi-desktop/src/features/mouse/inspector.rs:302-312 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject.rs:543 — crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject.rs:543-553 | crates/openlogi-inject/src/inject/macos.rs:429-439 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) crates/openlogi-device/src/write/backlight.rs:138 — crates/openlogi-device/src/write/backlight.rs:138-142 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/diagnostics.rs:67-71 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/smartshift.rs:282-286 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 7) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 7) crates/openlogi-device/src/write/backlight.rs:88 — crates/openlogi-device/src/write/backlight.rs:88-94 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/diagnostics.rs:290-296 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/dpi.rs:190-196 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/dpi.rs:231-237 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/hires_wheel.rs:27-33 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/smartshift.rs:252-258 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/smartshift.rs:304-310 — there are 7 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 7 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) crates/openlogi-device/src/write/dpi.rs:276 — crates/openlogi-device/src/write/dpi.rs:276-282 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/fn_lock.rs:90-96 | crates/openlogi-device/src/write/smartshift.rs:363-369 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-fixture/src/verify.rs:372 — crates/openlogi-fixture/src/verify.rs:372-391 | crates/openlogi-fixture/src/verify.rs:411-430 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) crates/openlogi-fixture/src/protocol_identity.rs:431 — crates/openlogi-fixture/src/protocol_identity.rs:431-438 | crates/openlogi-fixture/src/protocol_identity.rs:446-453 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

Minor — 5 finding(s)

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split crates/openlogi-desktop · ×1

Split crates/openlogi-desktop — At 33k LoC across 24 namespaces this is large and sprawls over UI, IPC, features (mouse/lighting/keyboard/camera), and platform subsystems. Suggested: split into cohesive desktop layers like ipc/services/ui/features/lighting/mouse/keyboard/camera

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

M2 · Architecture documentation · ADRs not easily discoverable · ×1

ADRs not easily discoverable — 1 ADR-shaped document(s) detected by content — `docs/DECISIONS.md`. They are not under a conventional ADR folder (docs/adr/) and are not named NNNN-title.md, and this check found them by their decision signature rather than by where they live — so a reader who does not already know these paths has no route to them. Detected by content signature only: records kept outside the repository, or written without a Status/Decision/Consequences shape, are not visible to this check and are not counted here.

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 14/16 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `crates/openlogi`, `xtask`.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-2a4104e4f6ca474a880534f3f884dc29/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-2a4104e4f6ca474a880534f3f884dc29/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	88	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	10	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.	0	—
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a0e9cb-0baa-750a-acfb-4e0d424a55dc · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

AprilNEA/OpenLogi

Findings by grade

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture — module dependency matrix

At a glance — Code Health · 91% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Architecture · 92% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 71% · Strong ·

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Strong ·

At a glance — Security · 79% · Adequate · gated by D36 ·

At a glance — Event Sourcing · 100% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts