Public report — EcoPaste, published 29 Sep 2026.
Concrete security findings (which rule fired, in which file, on which line; CVE IDs, secret matches,
dependency versions) are REDACTED in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Public
Codebase surveyMeasured under the Code Assurance Index · rubric rubric-2026.09.17 (frozen) · verify this surveyFiledcd_07479e184b0641558006728cf2231d44
Filed 29 September 2026, 13:38 UTC
Public
Medium · 38,088 LoC · 2 projects · rebuild ~0.3 person-years · weakest lens: Accessibility (51%)
Findings by grade
38 critical349 serious15 minor49 could not be resolved — could be critical — see Limitations
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
29 September 2026, 13:21 UTC
A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index does not certify,
approve or guarantee this codebase; it records a reproducible number and the evidence it was computed from. The
standard is authored by Canine Development, who also build Watchdog — its only implementation today. That is said
here so the number is checked rather than believed.
Grounded in facts. Every number here is computed, not narrated — reproducible, tool-backed, and traceable to a line of code. How to trust this ▸
384findings with an exact file:lineof 402 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
52/132dimensions across the health lenses38088 LoC · 2 projects — wide & deep
The system holds an adequate standing with a health score of 56%, indicating a workable asset that carries significant operational risk. While the core architecture is robust and performance is excellent, the overall reliability is compromised by gaps in accessibility and documentation maturity. This balance means the business can continue operations, but future changes will be slower and more expensive than necessary due to hidden maintenance taxes.
The value tied up in this medium-sized system is substantial, with nearly 40,000 lines of production code and 18,000 lines of frontend logic. Rebuilding this from scratch would cost approximately €39,000 and take about three months of engineering effort. However, the true cost lies in the annual drag on the team’s velocity. Current code quality signals suggest a 2–6% efficiency tax on every change, meaning the team pays a continuous premium in time and defects for every feature delivered, rather than just a one-time rebuild cost.
The most critical risk is accessibility, which scores poorly at 51%. This is not merely a compliance issue but a direct barrier to user trust and market reach. The cost of inaction is high, with estimated annual delays equivalent to over 30 engineer-days, making this the single highest-leverage area for improvement. Addressing this quickly pays for itself within months by removing the friction that slows down all subsequent development work.
A second theme is the concentration of knowledge in recent work, which threatens long-term maintainability. With low documentation maturity, new team members will struggle to pick up the code, increasing the risk of errors and extending onboarding times. This fragility is exacerbated by the lack of automated checks for accessibility in the current toolchain, allowing defects to slip into production.
The system’s genuine strengths lie in its solid architectural foundation and perfect performance metrics. The code is clean, with no boilerplate or straight-line logic, ensuring that the core business logic is efficient and easy to understand. This stability provides a reliable base for future growth, provided the accessibility and documentation gaps are addressed.
Focus first on enforcing accessibility in the development toolchain. By adding programmatic labels to controls and enabling automated accessibility checks in the continuous integration pipeline, the team can eliminate the most costly drag on velocity. This single action offers the fastest return on investment, stabilizing the system and freeing up engineering capacity for higher-value features.
How the score is built — each lens's share of the headlineWidth 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.
117 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-13) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required. Showing the first 100; the full set is in the report.
D4 · Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 43 shared lines) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py
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.
0.8× (at 56% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape
Medium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)
This codebase represents roughly ~0.3 person-years of build effort (about ~€39,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Accessibility at 51% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.
How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.0) — standard service × a 0.8× 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.
1
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
The top-ranked fix costs roughly 1–3 engineer-days once. Not doing it costs about 32.2–193.3 engineer-days every year, paid as drag on the ~525,267 lines this team changes annually — a bill that arrives whether or not anyone books it. On those figures the fix breaks even in roughly 1–2 months and is free after that. Method, stated so this is not read as a quotation: debt from the ranked task's effort band; interest = annual changed lines (measured, annualised from the 90-day window) ÷ an ASSUMED 150–400 lines per engineer-day × the 2–6% drag implied by the code-quality signals; breaking point = debt ÷ annual interest. A modelled planning range built from measured inputs and one named assumption — not a quotation, a valuation, or a certified figure.
Evidence: D15 churn: 129,518 line(s) changed over a 90-day window ⇒ ~525,267/year · D1/D2/D4/D6 code quality: averaging 7.0/10 ⇒ a 2–6% drag on each change · top-ranked remediation: Low effort ⇒ about 1–3 engineer-day(s)
→ Do the top-ranked fix now if this code will still be yours in 2 months.
Value concentrated against a weak lens · Medium · Value at risk
This is a Medium asset (~0.3 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Accessibility at 51%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
→ Direct remediation budget at Accessibility first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.
Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label. The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
A velocity tax on every change · Medium · Economics
The code-quality signals (complexity, duplication, cohesion) average 7.0/10, which acts as a tax on every change in the weaker areas: modifications there plausibly cost on the order of 2–6% more than in clean code, and the tax compounds as the codebase grows. (A modelled estimate, not a measured fact.)
Evidence: D1/D2/D4/D6 code quality: averaging 7.0/10 across the code-quality signals actually measured
→ Pay it down where churn is highest — the hotspots — not everywhere; that's where the tax is actually paid.
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.)
215 modules, 165 dependencies. 1 dependency cycle across 2 modules, marked above the diagonal.
Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 175 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.
EcoPaste.clipboard.apps_registry uses EcoPaste.clipboard.app_store. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.app_store can break EcoPaste.clipboard.apps_registry, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
11→8 EcoPaste.clipboard.apps_registry depends on EcoPaste.db.models✕
Type pairs
3 distinct (type in EcoPaste.clipboard.apps_registry → type in EcoPaste.db.models) references.
EcoPaste.commands.clipboard uses EcoPaste.clipboard.app_store. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.app_store can break EcoPaste.commands.clipboard, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
22→3 EcoPaste.commands.clipboard depends on EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.commands.clipboard → type in EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store) reference.
EcoPaste.commands.clipboard uses EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store can break EcoPaste.commands.clipboard, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
22→8 EcoPaste.commands.clipboard depends on EcoPaste.db.models✕
Type pairs
10 distinct (type in EcoPaste.commands.clipboard → type in EcoPaste.db.models) references.
EcoPaste.commands.clipboard uses EcoPaste.clipboard.storage. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.storage can break EcoPaste.commands.clipboard, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
23→3 EcoPaste.commands.drag depends on EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.commands.drag → type in EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store) reference.
EcoPaste.commands.drag uses EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.file_icon_store can break EcoPaste.commands.drag, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
23→8 EcoPaste.commands.drag depends on EcoPaste.db.models✕
Type pairs
2 distinct (type in EcoPaste.commands.drag → type in EcoPaste.db.models) references.
EcoPaste.commands.onboarding uses EcoPaste.clipboard.storage. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.storage can break EcoPaste.commands.onboarding, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
24→15 EcoPaste.commands.onboarding depends on EcoPaste.settings.model✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.commands.onboarding → type in EcoPaste.settings.model) reference.
src.pages.Preference.types.preferences uses src.types.settings. Changing src.types.settings can break src.pages.Preference.types.preferences, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher uses EcoPaste.clipboard.app_store. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.app_store can break EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
32→4 EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher depends on EcoPaste.clipboard.guard✕
Type pairs
2 distinct (type in EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher → type in EcoPaste.clipboard.guard) references.
EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher uses EcoPaste.clipboard.apps_registry. Changing EcoPaste.clipboard.apps_registry can break EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
32→12 EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher depends on EcoPaste.clipboard.source✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.clipboard.watcher → type in EcoPaste.clipboard.source) reference.
EcoPaste.commands.context_menu uses EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item. Changing EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item can break EcoPaste.commands.context_menu, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
34→15 EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native depends on EcoPaste.settings.model✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native → type in EcoPaste.settings.model) reference.
EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native uses EcoPaste.settings.model. Changing EcoPaste.settings.model can break EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
34→26 EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native depends on EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native → type in EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item) reference.
EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native uses EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item. Changing EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item can break EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item.native, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
35→18 src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer depends on src.types.settings✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer → type in src.types.settings) reference.
src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer uses src.types.settings. Changing src.types.settings can break src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
35→30 src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer depends on src.pages.Preference.types.preferences✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer → type in src.pages.Preference.types.preferences) reference.
src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer uses src.pages.Preference.types.preferences. Changing src.pages.Preference.types.preferences can break src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
36→16 src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls depends on src.commands✕
Type pairs
2 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls → type in src.commands) references.
src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls uses src.commands. Changing src.commands can break src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
36→18 src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls depends on src.types.settings✕
Type pairs
2 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls → type in src.types.settings) references.
src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls uses src.types.settings. Changing src.types.settings can break src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
36→30 src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls depends on src.pages.Preference.types.preferences✕
Type pairs
8 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls → type in src.pages.Preference.types.preferences) references.
src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls uses src.pages.Preference.types.preferences. Changing src.pages.Preference.types.preferences can break src.pages.Preference.components.settingControls, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
37→9 EcoPaste.backup depends on EcoPaste.db.state✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.backup → type in EcoPaste.db.state) reference.
EcoPaste.menu.context_window uses EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item. Changing EcoPaste.menu.clipboard_item can break EcoPaste.menu.context_window, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
38→33 EcoPaste.menu.context_window depends on EcoPaste.commands.context_menu✕
Type pairs
5 distinct (type in EcoPaste.menu.context_window → type in EcoPaste.commands.context_menu) references.
EcoPaste.menu.context_window uses EcoPaste.commands.context_menu. Changing EcoPaste.commands.context_menu can break EcoPaste.menu.context_window, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
39→10 src.pages.Preference.components depends on src.types.clipboard✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components → type in src.types.clipboard) reference.
src.pages.Preference.components uses src.pages.Preference.types.preferences. Changing src.pages.Preference.types.preferences can break src.pages.Preference.components, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
39→35 src.pages.Preference.components depends on src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in src.pages.Preference.components → type in src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer) reference.
src.pages.Preference.components uses src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer. Changing src.pages.Preference.components.SourceAppsTransfer can break src.pages.Preference.components, not the reverse.
Position
Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
40→7 EcoPaste.commands.storage depends on EcoPaste.core.paths✕
Type pairs
1 distinct (type in EcoPaste.commands.storage → type in EcoPaste.core.paths) reference.
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
30
High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components
13
High / Critical
A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures
1
High / Critical
Roadmap
First, ensure all form controls and buttons have proper programmatic labels and make custom interactive elements fully keyboard-operable with correct semantics. Next, enforce accessibility standards by enabling linting rules, adding automated checks in tests, and gating them in CI. Finally, enable dependency scanning tools to improve security and add tests for currently unreached production modules to increase coverage.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain you already use: enable Biome's a11y rule group in your biome.json `linter.rules` (it is off whenever `recommended` is false and the group is unlisted), then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
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 — 38
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 — 349
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 — 15
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. 48 of 52 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — 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 — 52 dimensions across the health lenses
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, 384 of 402 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
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.
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.
D11 Test Reliability — 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. Test source is present (.rs) and this repository declares a Cargo test suite (src-tauri, 28 test files), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
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 — 46 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 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. License Compliance couldn't be assessed within its 15-minute budget on a solution this large — not included in this run.
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 (23 contributor(s) across 813 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 85% of the history; the other 22 hold 0.7% 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.
D22 Internal API Consistency — 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. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (src-tauri/Cargo.toml), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 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. `.release-it.ts`, `src/App.tsx`, `src/components/ScrollArea/index.tsx`, `src/components/VirtuosoScroller/index.tsx`, `src/constants/windowOpenSelection.ts`, … (+5 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
D34 Knowledge Freshness — 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. File-level freshness contradicts repo activity: 48 commits in the last 90 days, yet 80 of 118 significant files carry no living knowledge. Those two readings cannot both be true, so the per-file recency signal is treated as unreliable here and freshness is not scored for this run.
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.
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.
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.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
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.
D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED 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.
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.
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.
AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
AC4 Keyboard semantics: Keyboard semantics are inferred from markup attributes — interactivity wired purely in script, focus managed at runtime, and component-level handlers are invisible. A clean result means "no static keyboard-trap shape", not a keyboard-operability proof.
AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
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 (4): D19, D21, 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.
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.
45 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was List.List at 150. A further 4 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 EcoPaste::i18n::zh_cn::clipboard_menu::label at 17 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 2 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: src-tauri/src/i18n/en_us/clipboard_menu.rs (EcoPaste::i18n::en_us::clipboard_menu::label at 17), src-tauri/src/i18n/zh_cn/clipboard_menu.rs (EcoPaste::i18n::zh_cn::clipboard_menu::label at 17). 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.
+ 26 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 6 session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with session-start.py (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cyclomatic 20) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with session-start.py (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 session-start._get_task_status (cyclomatic 19) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with session-start.py (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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.
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.
+ 46 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 6 session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with session-start.py (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 EcoPaste finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with ingest.rs (2), windows.rs, lib.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cognitive 30) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with session-start.py (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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 Classes5.8 / 10Adequate✓ 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.
Resolve the 23 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with index.tsx (5), List.tsx, Group.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (23 warning-level).
Resolve the 13 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with session-start.py (4), mod.rs, clipboard.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with List.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 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.
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.
91 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 24 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. Measured on part of this repository only: .tsx, .ts (48% of production source) was not exposed to THIS dimension's token comparison and is not in this count; duplication there is measured by R10 Code Duplication, the frontend lens's card running the same clone algorithm over the JS/TS token stream.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×8.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×7.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×6.claude/hooks/session-start.py:269
+ 71 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 8 Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with session-start.py (7), inject-subagent-context.py. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 7 Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with inject-workflow-state.py (7). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with session-start.py (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 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 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.
2 production modules (Cargo+npm), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 0 module(s) off the main sequence.
What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.
Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.
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.
188 test methods: 188 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 188 `#[test]` function(s) across 28 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 0 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.
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.
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.
Resolve the 3 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with List.tsx, lib.rs, ActionControl.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Repeated repair finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with onboarding.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
0 deducted task-comment markers across 38088 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.
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.
The repository's root README (README.md) and four architecture/Docs markdown files form a complete documentation set: the root gives an overview of EcoPaste as a Rust-first Tauri clipboard manager with features like local storage, SQLite search, native shortcuts, backup support, and cross-platform surface; the .trellis/spec/backend/architecture.md covers startup ordering, module ownership, platform boundary, error/async/concurrency constraints, and bundled-skills context injection; four bundled-skill architecture docs cover what counts as a bundled skill (multi-file vs single-file), current skills, where they land per platform, dispatch wiring, adding new skills, overriding locally, removing from projects, and operating rules; the .trellis/spec/overview.md gives an overview of the local Trellis architecture model with workflow, persistence, and integration layers plus core paths and AI customization principles. All documents are well-structured and complete for their scope. The Trellis local-architecture documentation is complete and well structured: a single README (the overview) plus four architecture/Docs markdown files covering workflow, workspace memory, bundled skills, context injection, generated-files, multi-agent channels, and the spec system. Each document has an explicit heading outline; every named section exists in the visible text. The README below the repository root is the project's own directory description (the overview), so it does not suffer from missing-overview or missing-usage defects. The repository is well documented with a single README (the root overview) and four separate architecture/design documents covering the workflow, workspace memory, bundled skills, and multi-agent channel layers. Each document has an explicit scope heading and a full outline; the visible content is clear and complete for its tier. The README below the root covers what the repository is for, installation, usage, contribution guidance, and licence — all four are present and well written.
Documentation: no installation or build instructions · ×2README.md
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
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.
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.
1 of 1 build units (Cargo) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.
Projects may be oversized for their cohesion
What to do
Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion 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.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: REDACTED 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.
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).
30 finding(s): 0 critical, 29 high, 1 medium, 0 low. 24 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 11 file(s) — `.agents/skills/sync-zh-changelog/agents/openai.yaml`, `.release-it.ts` (line 63), `src/App.tsx` (line 24), `src/components/ScrollArea/index.tsx` (line 14), `src/components/VirtuosoScroller/index.tsx` (line 11), … (+6 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
REDACTED
REDACTED
What to do
Resolve the 5 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 24 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (24 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).
Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir and Erlang via 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 (and Erlang, whose `rebar.lock` syft first converts to a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the lock), Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle (and Scala, whose sbt build's pinned direct declarations are written into a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the build file), 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.
Resolve the 3 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
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 CVE 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.
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.
Resolve the 1 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with index.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
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.
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.
1 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 1 platform declaration(s) and 20 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.
End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.96
What to do
Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions
R = React/JS · M = Maturity · P = Readiness.
AC1 · Text alternatives10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Accessibility — Whether non-text content carries a text alternative — img/area/input[type=image] have alt, a meaningful svg has a title or aria-label, video has a captions track, and object/embed/canvas have a name or fallback content. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: every img/area/input[type=image] checked for alt, svg[role=img] for a title/aria-label, video for a captions <track>. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.
Coverage: Population: image/media elements — img, area, input[type=image], svg, video, object, embed, canvas — across the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and dynamic-attribute elements are skipped. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is NOT read by any producer, so it contributes no element to this population; where such a frontend is present the card discloses it as an analyzer gap rather than scoring around it.
Do you agree with this assessment?
AC2 · Forms & labels4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.
Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
A button with no text and no aria-label has no accessible name. Add visible text or an aria-label (an icon-only button still needs one). (×2) — src/components/ClipboardGroupModal/index.tsx:200, src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:655
This UI-library field component has no label / aria-label / aria-labelledby / id / name — and neither does anything it renders — so it likely renders an unlabelled control. Name it whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed. (×4) — src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:120, src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ClipboardGroupSelectControl.tsx:93, src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:33, …
A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one. — src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:314
This UI-library field component is named only by a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes as soon as the user types, and many assistive technologies ignore it). Give it a real name whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/Header.tsx:189
What to do
Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language (well-formed BCP-47) and a non-empty title, expose exactly one main landmark and a sane heading order with non-empty headings, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes, give data tables header cells, and avoid meta-refresh. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: html lang, document <title>, a main landmark and heading order on full documents only, plus zoom-disabling viewports, untitled iframes and meta-refresh anywhere. Deterministic, per structural checkpoint.
Coverage: Population: the PARSED MARKUP documents (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx). The page-level checks — lang, title, single main landmark — fire ONCE PER FULL DOCUMENT (an <html> root) and never on a partial or component fragment, so a repo of fragments is assessed only on the per-element checks (heading order, table headers, iframe titles, meta-refresh, zoom). Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
Other · Accessibility — Whether interactive behaviour is keyboard-reachable — no click handler on a non-interactive element lacking a role, tabindex and key handler, no element the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer` without giving it any of the three, no unfocusable element whose only binding is a mouse enter/leave pair or a double-click, no positive tabindex, no href-less anchor, no placeholder-href (#/javascript) link acting as a button. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: click handlers on non-interactive elements lacking role+tabindex+key handler, positive tabindex values, and href-less anchors. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.
Coverage: Population: elements that pose a keyboard-semantics question, in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) — a non-natively-interactive element carrying a click handler, a double-click or hover enter/leave binding, a pointer-only gesture on a tabindex="0" element, or `cursor: pointer` from the repo's own CSS; an href-less or placeholder-href (#, javascript:) anchor; and any element with a positive tabindex. Natively interactive elements used correctly (<button>, <a href>, form controls) are NOT in the population — there is nothing to judge — so a page of nothing but correct controls gives AC4 nothing to measure. Keyboard reachability is judged from the markup, never from a rendered page. ★ An interactive element declared in a tagged-template (html`…`) or hyperscript frontend is NOT in this population — no producer reads either — so an empty population is reported as an analyzer gap, never as "this repository has no interactive elements".
This <div> binds mousedown, pointermove, dragstart and double-click — pointer gestures with no keyboard form, a double-click among them. No click, no key handler, and no tabIndex={0}, so it cannot even take focus. Nothing synthesises a double-click from the keyboard: Enter and Space fire a single click, and only on a native <button> or <a href>. So this behaviour has no keyboard path at all. Expose the same action on a real control, or add role + tabIndex={0} + a key handler alongside the double-click. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/cards/ClipboardCard.tsx:136
What to do
Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.
Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: role values checked against the WAI-ARIA role set (abstract/invalid flagged), required ARIA state for a role, and aria-hidden on a focusable element. Deterministic, role/attribute level.
Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS literals are read (hex/rgb/hsl/named), never computed/runtime/external-CDN colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup/CSS scan: inline outline:none/0, literal inline colour/background contrast against the 4.5:1 AA floor, and <style>-block animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard. Deterministic but PARTIAL — only inline styles and in-repo CSS literals are visible.
Coverage: Population: styled elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx), plus in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files and CSS-in-JS literals. Colour contrast is computed from LITERAL colour pairs only (hex/rgb/hsl/named, including var() tokens and Tailwind neutral utilities) — computed, runtime-themed and external-CDN colour is never resolved, so this is a partial read of contrast by construction. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
Do you agree with this assessment?
AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.
Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.
Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.
No accessibility enforcement found — your Biome config enables no a11y rules and there's no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start by turning on Biome's own a11y rule group to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 80 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
What to do
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain you already use: enable Biome's a11y rule group in your biome.json `linter.rules` (it is off whenever `recommended` is false and the group is unlisted), then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
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.
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.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
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.
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 build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
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 2 of 2 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
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.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
What to do
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
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.
Tauri version claimed (v2) vs evidence — searched for: `Tauri v2`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, Dockerfile); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
React 19 frontend claim contradicts no component in the repo — reported by the model that read the README against this repository; no term search was run for this one, so nothing here has been checked against the tree. Treat it as a reading to confirm, not as a measured contradiction: verify it against the code before acting on it, and if the footprint it describes does exist, this row is wrong.
README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists — searched for: `dockerfile`, `docker-compose`, `compose.yaml`, `compose.yml`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, Dockerfile); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
What to do
Reconcile the README with reality: Tauri version claimed (v2) vs evidence; React 19 frontend claim contradicts no component in the repo; README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists.
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.
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.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether database schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than being auto-created from the model at startup.
Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage; off .NET, a file scan of dependency manifests, migration histories (Flyway, Liquibase, Alembic, Django, Rails, Prisma, TypeORM, Knex/Sequelize, golang-migrate, goose, Laravel, Doctrine, Diesel/sqlx) and schema auto-create in production source or config. Exhaustive, deterministic.
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?
R1 · Type Safety10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.
Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.
React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.
Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.
7 duplicated blocks under src/pages/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories Clipboard, ContextMenu, Preference, Preview, Update — 5 of them are reported below, and 2 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 7 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 7 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 7 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:427
src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:55 · src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:53 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 561 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:55
src/pages/Onboarding/components/DoneStep.tsx:14 · src/pages/Onboarding/components/WelcomeStep.tsx:14 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — src/pages/Onboarding/components/DoneStep.tsx:14
src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/CaptureOrderControl.tsx:54 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SortableCheckboxTreeControl.tsx:76 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/CaptureOrderControl.tsx:54
src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:427 · src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:124 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:427
src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:159 · src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:185 — 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. — src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:159
src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:43 · src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:82 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:43
src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:322 · src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:74 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:322
src/components/Dropdown/index.tsx:83 · src/components/Popover/index.tsx:20 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/components/Dropdown/index.tsx:83
src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:107 · src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:190 — 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. — src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:107
src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:220 · src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:270 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 67 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:220
src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:136 · src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:183 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 62 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:136
src/pages/Preference/config/preferenceSchema.ts:908 · src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:422 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 53 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/pages/Preference/config/preferenceSchema.ts:908
src/pages/ContextMenu/index.tsx:242 · src/pages/Preview/index.tsx:109 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 51 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/pages/ContextMenu/index.tsx:242
src/pages/Preference/utils/storageUsage.ts:11 · src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:380 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — src/pages/Preference/utils/storageUsage.ts:11
src/pages/Update/index.tsx:117 · src/pages/Update/index.tsx:130 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Update/index.tsx:117
src/utils/shortcut.ts:207 · src/utils/shortcut.ts:233 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/utils/shortcut.ts:207
src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:129 · src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:151 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:129
src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:11 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/TextControl.tsx:9 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:11
src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:18 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:50 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:18
src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:13 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/RetentionControl.tsx:36 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:13
src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:111 · src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:54 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:111
What to do
Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.
Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.
handleKeyDown has cyclomatic complexity 32 and cognitive complexity 39; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:587
PreferenceSettingControl has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/PreferenceSettingControl.tsx:50
current has cyclomatic complexity 23 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:522
resolveSectionVisual has cyclomatic complexity 22 and cognitive complexity 20; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSection.tsx:136
Update has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Update/index.tsx:43
handleQuickAction has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:872
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 18 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/commands/index.ts:1082
PreferenceSettingRow has cyclomatic complexity 18 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSettingRow.tsx:42
BackupImportModal has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:31
isItemActionAvailable has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 3; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/constants/itemActions.ts:240
Preview has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preview/index.tsx:62
getEmptyDescription has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:1117
handleWindowVisibility has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:284
settingValuesEqual has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/services/preferenceSettings.ts:26
handleClick has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx:323
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:80
ClipboardCard has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/components/cards/ClipboardCard.tsx:58
openPreviewForItem has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Clipboard/hooks/useClipboardPreviewController.ts:348
PreferenceStorageUsagePanel has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceStorageUsagePanel.tsx:21
Preference has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:70
What to do
Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R3 · Large Files8.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.
Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.
What to do
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R4 · Test Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.
Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.
0% of 125 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count
What to do
Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
Do you agree with this assessment?
R6 · Tooling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.
Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R7 · Dead Code9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).
Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.
Unreachable from the 5 application, 5 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on `pnpm run build` — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
no import path from any entry point (5 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make — src/hooks/useWindowLifecycle.ts
Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal. (×4) — src/constants/urls.ts:6, src/stores/windowLifecycle.ts:54, src/unocss/presetAntdColors.ts:78, …
What to do
Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.
React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.
Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.
Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it. (×3)
What to do
Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.
Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.
Break each cycle by extracting the shared piece into a module both sides can import.
Do you agree with this assessment?
WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed
Statically assessed 15 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (27%; ≈30% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 40 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).
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.
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 — 76 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.
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
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) 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
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
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
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 — ~3 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.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .rs suite was found but not re-run
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 46 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 — License Compliance not included (time budget)
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.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
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. 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 — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — symbol resolution incomplete — navigability not assessed
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) — 10 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D34 Knowledge Freshness — knowledge concentrated in recent work — freshness signal contradicted by repo activity
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
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.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (8 value object(s))
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.
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
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
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
R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
R5 Dependency Freshness — uses a pnpm lockfile — dependency freshness not measured here; JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
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.
AC2 · Forms & labels· <button> with no accessible text · ×2
<button> with no accessible text src/components/ClipboardGroupModal/index.tsx:200— A button with no text and no aria-label has no accessible name. Add visible text or an aria-label (an icon-only button still needs one).
<button> with no accessible text src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:655— A button with no text and no aria-label has no accessible name. Add visible text or an aria-label (an icon-only button still needs one).
AC4 · Keyboard semantics· Double-click handler on a non-interactive <div> · ×1
Double-click handler on a non-interactive <div> src/pages/Clipboard/components/cards/ClipboardCard.tsx:136— This <div> binds mousedown, pointermove, dragstart and double-click — pointer gestures with no keyboard form, a double-click among them. No click, no key handler, and no tabIndex={0}, so it cannot even take focus. Nothing synthesises a double-click from the keyboard: Enter and Space fire a single click, and only on a native <button> or <a href>. So this behaviour has no keyboard path at all. Expose the same action on a real control, or add role + tabIndex={0} + a key handler alongside the double-click.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: index.tsx ↔ index.ts src/pages/Preference/index.tsx— `src/pages/Preference/index.tsx` (context pages) and `src/router/index.ts` (context router) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 74% of the time (14 of the 19 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) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 14 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `b9afe513` feat: 在偏好设置窗口中切换页面时，新增了过渡动画 (#748) (at that commit the file was still `src/layouts/Preference/index.tsx`); `62aa9809` refactor: 双窗口模式+哈希路由 (#357) (at that commit the file was still `src/layouts/Preference/index.tsx`); `2f74cb00` fix: 修复在 Windows 上 app 无限重启的 bug (#327) (at that commit the file was still `src/layouts/Preference/index.tsx`) — run `git show` on any of them.
FunctionTooLong: List.List src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:86— FunctionTooLong — List runs 654 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 554 over it, 6.54× 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.
FunctionTooLong: Group.Group src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:109— FunctionTooLong — Group runs 348 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 248 over it, 3.48× 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.
FunctionTooLong: useClipboardPreviewController.useClipboardPreviewController src/pages/Clipboard/hooks/useClipboardPreviewController.ts:46— FunctionTooLong — useClipboardPreviewController runs 287 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 187 over it, 2.87× 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.
FunctionTooLong: ActionControl.ActionControl src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx:100— FunctionTooLong — ActionControl runs 268 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 168 over it, 2.68× 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.
FunctionTooLong: index.Preference src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:70— FunctionTooLong — Preference runs 245 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 145 over it, 2.45× 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.
FunctionTooLong: EcoPaste::run src-tauri/src/lib.rs:25— FunctionTooLong — EcoPaste::run runs 224 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 124 over it, 2.24× 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.
FunctionTooLong: useClipboardItems.useClipboardItems src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:28— FunctionTooLong — useClipboardItems runs 218 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 118 over it, 2.18× 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.
FunctionTooLong: index.ShortcutRecorder src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:43— FunctionTooLong — ShortcutRecorder runs 202 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 102 over it, 2.02× 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.
FunctionTooLong: index.Update src/pages/Update/index.tsx:43— FunctionTooLong — Update runs 201 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 101 over it, 2.01× 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.
FunctionTooLong: BackupExportModal.BackupExportModal src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:32— FunctionTooLong — BackupExportModal runs 178 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 78 over it, 1.78× 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.
FunctionTooLong: motion.usePreviewMotion src/pages/Preview/motion.ts:16— FunctionTooLong — usePreviewMotion runs 172 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 72 over it, 1.72× 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.
FunctionTooLong: BackupImportModal.BackupImportModal src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:31— FunctionTooLong — BackupImportModal runs 159 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 59 over it, 1.59× 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.
FunctionTooLong: LegacyImportStep.LegacyImportStep src/pages/Onboarding/components/LegacyImportStep.tsx:17— FunctionTooLong — LegacyImportStep runs 149 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 49 over it, 1.49× 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.
FunctionTooLong: PreferenceSearchResults.PreferenceSearchResults src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSearchResults.tsx:33— FunctionTooLong — PreferenceSearchResults runs 135 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 35 over it, 1.35× 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.
FunctionTooLong: ClipboardGroupManagerModal.ClipboardGroupManagerModal src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:48— FunctionTooLong — ClipboardGroupManagerModal runs 127 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 27 over it, 1.27× 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.
FunctionTooLong: index.ClipboardGroupModal src/components/ClipboardGroupModal/index.tsx:74— FunctionTooLong — ClipboardGroupModal runs 126 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 26 over it, 1.26× 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.
FunctionTooLong: PreferenceSettingControl.PreferenceSettingControl src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/PreferenceSettingControl.tsx:50— FunctionTooLong — PreferenceSettingControl runs 126 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 26 over it, 1.26× 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.
FunctionTooLong: index.Preview src/pages/Preview/index.tsx:62— FunctionTooLong — Preview runs 126 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 26 over it, 1.26× 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.
FunctionTooLong: SourceAppsTransfer.SourceAppsTransfer src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:48— FunctionTooLong — SourceAppsTransfer runs 117 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 17 over it, 1.17× 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.
FunctionTooLong: Header.Header src/pages/Clipboard/components/Header.tsx:40— FunctionTooLong — Header runs 113 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 13 over it, 1.13× 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.
FunctionTooLong: ClipboardCard.ClipboardCard src/pages/Clipboard/components/cards/ClipboardCard.tsx:58— FunctionTooLong — ClipboardCard runs 113 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 13 over it, 1.13× 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.
FunctionTooLong: EcoPaste::clipboard::ingest::build_item_with_settings src-tauri/src/clipboard/ingest.rs:193— FunctionTooLong — EcoPaste::clipboard::ingest::build_item_with_settings runs 111 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 11 over it, 1.11× 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.
FunctionTooLong: PreferenceSettingRow.PreferenceSettingRow src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSettingRow.tsx:42— FunctionTooLong — PreferenceSettingRow runs 104 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 4 over it, 1.04× 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.
FileTooLong: backup/mod.rs src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs— FileTooLong — 1027 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 57 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 527 over it, 2.05× 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: commands/clipboard.rs src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs— FileTooLong — 1005 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 61 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 505 over it, 2.01× 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: components/List.tsx src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx— FileTooLong — 887 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 74% of them inside a single declaration: List (86-1112). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 387 over it, 1.77× 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: commands/index.ts src/commands/index.ts— FileTooLong — 771 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 271 over it, 1.54× 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: components/Group.tsx src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx— FileTooLong — 607 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 107 over it, 1.21× 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: config/preferenceSchema.ts src/pages/Preference/config/preferenceSchema.ts— FileTooLong — 604 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 104 over it, 1.21× 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: commands/onboarding.rs src-tauri/src/commands/onboarding.rs— FileTooLong — 576 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 76 over it, 1.15× 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: hooks/session-start.py .claude/hooks/session-start.py— FileTooLong — 561 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.12× 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: hooks/session-start.py .cursor/hooks/session-start.py— FileTooLong — 561 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.12× 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: hooks/session-start.py .gemini/hooks/session-start.py— FileTooLong — 561 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.12× 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: hooks/session-start.py .kiro/hooks/session-start.py— FileTooLong — 561 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.12× 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: common/session_context.py .trellis/scripts/common/session_context.py— FileTooLong — 555 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 55 over it, 1.11× 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: window/preview.rs src-tauri/src/window/preview.rs— FileTooLong — 531 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 36 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 31 over it, 1.06× 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×8
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276-311 | .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:315-339 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276-311 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:315-339 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276-311 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:315-339 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:100— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:123-142 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:128-147 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:160— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:295-309 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:300-314 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:178— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:313-319 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:318-324 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:570— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:570-597 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:330-353 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:570-597 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:570-597 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:335-358 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:570-597 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:605— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:361-413 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:366-418 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:661— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:661-682 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:417-433 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:661-682 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:661-682 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:422-438 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:661-682 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:692— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:692-703 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:443-446 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:692-703 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:692-703 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:448-451 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:692-703 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×7
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:356— session-start._build_compact_current_state 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:361— session-start._build_compact_current_state 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cyclomatic 16) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:356— session-start._build_compact_current_state has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:361— session-start._build_compact_current_state has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 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.
session-start._build_compact_current_state (cognitive 23) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:600— session-start._build_compact_current_state has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 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.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities· Medium advisory (unmaintained) · ×6
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×6
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:269— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:328— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:421— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:465— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:517— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:726— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1277— src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1277-1287 | src-tauri/src/commands/storage.rs:395-405 — 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 (11 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1331— src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1331-1341 | src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1429-1439 — 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 (11 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:79— src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:79-89 | src-tauri/src/shortcut/win_v.rs:54-66 — 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 (11 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:202— src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:202-212 | src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:244-254 — 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 (11 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/task.py:430— .trellis/scripts/task.py:430-440 | .trellis/scripts/task.py:455-465 — 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 (11 lines × 2) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:109— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:109-119 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:114-124 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
EcoPaste::keyboard::windows::hook_proc (cognitive 76) src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:131— EcoPaste::keyboard::windows::hook_proc has cognitive complexity 76 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 29 (71 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 42). 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.
EcoPaste::run (cognitive 38) src-tauri/src/lib.rs:25— EcoPaste::run has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 24 (35 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), match/switch 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.
EcoPaste::clipboard::ingest::build_item_with_settings (cognitive 22) src-tauri/src/clipboard/ingest.rs:193— EcoPaste::clipboard::ingest::build_item_with_settings has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (20 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.
EcoPaste::clipboard::ingest::draft_from_text (cognitive 21) src-tauri/src/clipboard/ingest.rs:81— EcoPaste::clipboard::ingest::draft_from_text has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 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.
EcoPaste::window::show_window (cognitive 19) src-tauri/src/window/mod.rs:112— EcoPaste::window::show_window has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (18 pts), 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/clipboard/apps_registry.rs:350— src-tauri/src/clipboard/apps_registry.rs:350-354 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/source.rs:78-82 — 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 (5 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs:835— src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs:835-839 | src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs:928-932 — 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) src-tauri/src/menu/context_window.rs:157— src-tauri/src/menu/context_window.rs:157-161 | src-tauri/src/menu/context_window.rs:196-200 — 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) src-tauri/src/window/position.rs:55— src-tauri/src/window/position.rs:55-59 | src-tauri/src/window/position.rs:80-84 — 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) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:101— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:101-105 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:106-110 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
AC2 · Forms & labels· <Select> field component without a label · ×4
<Select> field component without a label src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:120— This UI-library field component has no label / aria-label / aria-labelledby / id / name — and neither does anything it renders — so it likely renders an unlabelled control. Name it whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed.
<Select> field component without a label src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ClipboardGroupSelectControl.tsx:93— This UI-library field component has no label / aria-label / aria-labelledby / id / name — and neither does anything it renders — so it likely renders an unlabelled control. Name it whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed.
<Select> field component without a label src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:33— This UI-library field component has no label / aria-label / aria-labelledby / id / name — and neither does anything it renders — so it likely renders an unlabelled control. Name it whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed.
<Select> field component without a label src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:65— This UI-library field component has no label / aria-label / aria-labelledby / id / name — and neither does anything it renders — so it likely renders an unlabelled control. Name it whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cyclomatic 20) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cyclomatic 20) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cyclomatic 20) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cyclomatic 20) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cyclomatic 19) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cyclomatic 19) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cyclomatic 19) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cyclomatic 19) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cognitive 30) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (21 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 1 (2 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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cognitive 30) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (21 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 1 (2 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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cognitive 30) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (21 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 1 (2 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.
session-start._resolve_spec_scope (cognitive 30) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:510— session-start._resolve_spec_scope has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (21 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 1 (2 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.
session-start._get_task_status (cognitive 23) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (15 pts), boolean chains 5, error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cognitive 23) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (15 pts), boolean chains 5, error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cognitive 23) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (15 pts), boolean chains 5, error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (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.
session-start._get_task_status (cognitive 23) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:327— session-start._get_task_status has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (15 pts), boolean chains 5, error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (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.
session-start._collect_spec_index_paths (cognitive 19) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:569— session-start._collect_spec_index_paths has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
session-start._collect_spec_index_paths (cognitive 19) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:569— session-start._collect_spec_index_paths has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
session-start._collect_spec_index_paths (cognitive 19) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:569— session-start._collect_spec_index_paths has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
session-start._collect_spec_index_paths (cognitive 19) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:569— session-start._collect_spec_index_paths has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
session-start._load_trellis_config (cognitive 17) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:420— session-start._load_trellis_config has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
session-start._load_trellis_config (cognitive 17) .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:420— session-start._load_trellis_config has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
session-start._load_trellis_config (cognitive 17) .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:420— session-start._load_trellis_config has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
session-start._load_trellis_config (cognitive 17) .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:420— session-start._load_trellis_config has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/settings/store.rs:32— src-tauri/src/settings/store.rs:32-40 | src-tauri/src/settings/store.rs:113-118 — 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) src-tauri/src/autostart/macos.rs:26— src-tauri/src/autostart/macos.rs:26-31 | src-tauri/src/autostart/windows.rs:35-40 — 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) src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:54— src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:54-59 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs:43-48 — before extracting anything, compare `src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs` and `src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:164— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:164-169 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:169-174 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name (cyclomatic 18) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:577— inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name 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.
inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name (cyclomatic 18) .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:577— inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name 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.
inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name (cyclomatic 18) .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:577— inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name 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.
Hotspot: src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:86— src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 150 in List.List 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 2026-05-14..2026-08-12, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-05-14 12:05:51 +08:00' --until='2026-08-12 12:05:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx`: 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: src-tauri/src/lib.rs src-tauri/src/lib.rs:25— src-tauri/src/lib.rs changed 9 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in EcoPaste::run at line 25. 4 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 5 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 2026-05-14..2026-08-12, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-05-14 12:05:51 +08:00' --until='2026-08-12 12:05:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src-tauri/src/lib.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: src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx:100— src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 27 in ActionControl.ActionControl at line 100. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 3 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 2026-05-14..2026-08-12, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-05-14 12:05:51 +08:00' --until='2026-08-12 12:05:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx`: 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.
inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name (cognitive 30) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:577— inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (28 pts), loops 2 (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.
inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name (cognitive 30) .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:577— inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (28 pts), loops 2 (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.
inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name (cognitive 30) .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:577— inject-subagent-context._extract_subagent_name has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (28 pts), loops 2 (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.
inject-subagent-context.read_jsonl_entries (cognitive 17) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:190— inject-subagent-context.read_jsonl_entries has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), error handling 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
inject-subagent-context.read_jsonl_entries (cognitive 17) .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:190— inject-subagent-context.read_jsonl_entries has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), error handling 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
inject-subagent-context.read_jsonl_entries (cognitive 17) .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:190— inject-subagent-context.read_jsonl_entries has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), error handling 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
inject-subagent-context.main (cognitive 16) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:687— inject-subagent-context.main has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). 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.
inject-subagent-context.main (cognitive 16) .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:687— inject-subagent-context.main has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). 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.
inject-subagent-context.main (cognitive 16) .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:687— inject-subagent-context.main has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). 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.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:61— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:61-67 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:83-89 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:61-67 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:61-67 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:93-99 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:61-67 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:178— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:313-319 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:318-324 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:178-184 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:318— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:318-324 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:214-220 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:318-324 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:318-324 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:219-225 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:318-324 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (12 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×3
Duplicated block with local edits (12 matched lines × 2 locations) src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:220— src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:220 · src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:270 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 67 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (12 matched lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:136— src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:136 · src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:183 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 62 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (12 matched lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/config/preferenceSchema.ts:908— src/pages/Preference/config/preferenceSchema.ts:908 · src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:422 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 53 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
EcoPaste::keyboard::windows::hook_proc (cyclomatic 32) src-tauri/src/keyboard/windows.rs:131— EcoPaste::keyboard::windows::hook_proc has cyclomatic complexity 32 (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.
EcoPaste::run (cyclomatic 26) src-tauri/src/lib.rs:25— EcoPaste::run has cyclomatic complexity 26 (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.
session-start._collect_spec_index_paths (cognitive 16) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:329— session-start._collect_spec_index_paths has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), 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.
session-start._collect_spec_index_paths (cognitive 16) .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:334— session-start._collect_spec_index_paths has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), 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.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/clipboard/apps_registry.rs:537— src-tauri/src/clipboard/apps_registry.rs:537-549 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/source.rs:130-142 — 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 (13 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/mouse/windows.rs:21— src-tauri/src/mouse/windows.rs:21-33 | src-tauri/src/shortcut/win_v.rs:47-59 — 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) src-tauri/src/window/state.rs:37— src-tauri/src/window/state.rs:37-45 | src-tauri/src/window/state.rs:108-117 — 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 (9 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/admin.rs:196— src-tauri/src/admin.rs:196-204 | src-tauri/src/admin.rs:281-289 — 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 (8 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/update.rs:95— src-tauri/src/update.rs:95-102 | src-tauri/src/update.rs:114-121 — 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 (8 lines × 2) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:153— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:153-160 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:158-165 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:44— src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:44-51 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs:33-40 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/storage.rs:72-79 — before extracting anything, compare `src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs` and `src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:486— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:486-493 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:486-493 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:486-493 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1089— src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1089-1100 | src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1126-1137 | src-tauri/src/backup/mod.rs:1155-1166 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:68— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:68-79 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:68-79 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:68-79 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:173— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:173-191 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:178-196 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:663— .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:663-681 | .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:729-747 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:160— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:295-309 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:300-314 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:160-174 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:300— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:300-314 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:196-210 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:300-314 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:300-314 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:201-215 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:300-314 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/components/Dropdown/index.tsx:83— src/components/Dropdown/index.tsx:83 · src/components/Popover/index.tsx:20 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:107— src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:107 · src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:190 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (11 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×2
Duplicated block with local edits (11 matched lines × 2 locations) src/pages/ContextMenu/index.tsx:242— src/pages/ContextMenu/index.tsx:242 · src/pages/Preview/index.tsx:109 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 51 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (11 matched lines × 2 locations) src/utils/shortcut.ts:207— src/utils/shortcut.ts:207 · src/utils/shortcut.ts:233 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/utils/storageUsage.ts:11— src/pages/Preference/utils/storageUsage.ts:11 · src/pages/Preview/components/PreviewContent.tsx:380 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Update/index.tsx:117— src/pages/Update/index.tsx:117 · src/pages/Update/index.tsx:130 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:11— src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:11 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/TextControl.tsx:9 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:18— src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:18 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SelectControls.tsx:50 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
AC2 · Forms & labels· <fieldset> without a <legend> · ×1
<fieldset> without a <legend> src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:314— A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
AC2 · Forms & labels· <SearchInput> field component without a label · ×1
<SearchInput> field component without a label src/pages/Clipboard/components/Header.tsx:189— This UI-library field component is named only by a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes as soon as the user types, and many assistive technologies ignore it). Give it a real name whichever way this library supports: a label prop, an aria-label, or an id on the rendered control with a <label htmlFor> pointing at it. For a group of controls, name the group itself (aria-label, or a fieldset with a legend) — labelling each item leaves the set unnamed.
AC7 · A11y enforcement· Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — your Biome config enables no a11y rules and there's no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start by turning on Biome's own a11y rule group to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 80 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
List.List (cyclomatic 150) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:86— List.List has cyclomatic complexity 150 (threshold 15). Of this number, 24 points are the body's own statements and 126 belong to 22 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
useClipboardPreviewController.useClipboardPreviewController (cyclomatic 61) src/pages/Clipboard/hooks/useClipboardPreviewController.ts:46— useClipboardPreviewController.useClipboardPreviewController has cyclomatic complexity 61 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 14 of the 61 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 16 function literals inside it that branch (lines 348, 159, 72, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
Group.Group (cyclomatic 43) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:109— Group.Group has cyclomatic complexity 43 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 3 of the 43 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 16 function literals inside it that branch (lines 261, 223, 369, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
index.Update (cyclomatic 35) src/pages/Update/index.tsx:43— index.Update has cyclomatic complexity 35 (threshold 15). Of this number, 20 points are the body's own statements and 15 belong to 7 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
index.ShortcutRecorder (cyclomatic 34) src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:43— index.ShortcutRecorder has cyclomatic complexity 34 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 34 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 11 function literals inside it that branch (lines 240, 216, 287, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
(anonymous)::tool.execute.before (cyclomatic 32) .opencode/plugins/inject-subagent-context.js:380— (anonymous)::tool.execute.before has cyclomatic complexity 32 (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.
buildSessionContext (cyclomatic 31) .opencode/lib/session-utils.js:236— buildSessionContext has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). Of this number, 28 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
cli_adapter.detect_platform (cyclomatic 30) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:688— cli_adapter.detect_platform has cyclomatic complexity 30 (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.
task_store.cmd_create (cyclomatic 28) .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:196— task_store.cmd_create has cyclomatic complexity 28 (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.
index.Preference (cyclomatic 28) src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:70— index.Preference has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 7 of the 28 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 9 function literals inside it that branch (lines 203, 155, 298, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
ActionControl.ActionControl (cyclomatic 27) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx:100— ActionControl.ActionControl has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 11 of the 27 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 323, 270, 160). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
BackupImportModal.BackupImportModal (cyclomatic 26) src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:31— BackupImportModal.BackupImportModal has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 12 of the 26 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 6 function literals inside it that branch (lines 58, 96, 125, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
useClipboardItems.useClipboardItems (cyclomatic 25) src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:28— useClipboardItems.useClipboardItems has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 25 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 8 function literals inside it that branch (lines 80, 261, 239, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
BackupExportModal.BackupExportModal (cyclomatic 25) src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:32— BackupExportModal.BackupExportModal has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 11 of the 25 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 6 function literals inside it that branch (lines 60, 87, 142, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
PreferenceSettingControl.PreferenceSettingControl (cyclomatic 24) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/PreferenceSettingControl.tsx:50— PreferenceSettingControl.PreferenceSettingControl has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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.
CLIAdapter.get_commands_path (cyclomatic 22) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:163— CLIAdapter.get_commands_path 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.
PreferenceSection.resolveSectionVisual (cyclomatic 22) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSection.tsx:136— PreferenceSection.resolveSectionVisual has cyclomatic complexity 22 (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.
add_session.update_index (cyclomatic 21) .trellis/scripts/add_session.py:204— add_session.update_index 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.
CLIAdapter.build_run_command (cyclomatic 20) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:321— CLIAdapter.build_run_command has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
session_context.get_context_text (cyclomatic 18) .trellis/scripts/common/session_context.py:507— session_context.get_context_text 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.
PreferenceSettingRow.PreferenceSettingRow (cyclomatic 18) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSettingRow.tsx:42— PreferenceSettingRow.PreferenceSettingRow has cyclomatic complexity 18 (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.
ClipboardMenuAction::label (cyclomatic 17) src-tauri/src/menu/clipboard_item.rs:47— ClipboardMenuAction::label 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.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 17) .opencode/plugins/session-start.js:22— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 17 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch (chat.message, event, chat.message::(anonymous)). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
resolveSpecScope (cyclomatic 17) .opencode/lib/session-utils.js:202— resolveSpecScope 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.
packages_context._resolve_scope_set (cyclomatic 16) .trellis/scripts/common/packages_context.py:53— packages_context._resolve_scope_set 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.
PermissionControl.PermissionControl (cyclomatic 16) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/PermissionControl.tsx:38— PermissionControl.PermissionControl has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 5 of the 16 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 5 function literals inside it that branch (lines 101, 50, 130, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
Repeated repair: src-tauri/src/commands/onboarding.rs src-tauri/src/commands/onboarding.rs:139— src-tauri/src/commands/onboarding.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 9 (its worst body is EcoPaste::commands::onboarding::import_legacy_data at line 139), 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: correct timezone offset for legacy data import (#1338)”; “fix: skip invalid legacy import rows (#1326)”; “fix: improve legacy import detection (#1289)”. 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 2026-05-14..2026-08-12, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-05-14 12:05:51 +08:00' --until='2026-08-12 12:05:51 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src-tauri/src/commands/onboarding.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.
List.List (cognitive 132) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:86— List.List has cognitive complexity 132 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 84 (105 pts), boolean chains 18, ternaries 7, match/switch 2 (nesting depth added 21). Of this number, 23 points are the body's own statements and 109 belong to 22 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
buildSessionContext (cognitive 65) .opencode/lib/session-utils.js:236— buildSessionContext has cognitive complexity 65 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (37 pts), error handling 4 (12 pts), loops 5 (12 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 34). Of this number, 57 points are the body's own statements and 8 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
useClipboardPreviewController.useClipboardPreviewController (cognitive 56) src/pages/Clipboard/hooks/useClipboardPreviewController.ts:46— useClipboardPreviewController.useClipboardPreviewController has cognitive complexity 56 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 43 (46 pts), boolean chains 9, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). Most of this is not in the body itself: 13 of the 56 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 16 function literals inside it that branch (lines 348, 159, 72, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
task_store.cmd_create (cognitive 44) .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:196— task_store.cmd_create has cognitive complexity 44 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (32 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 2 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (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.
(anonymous)::tool.execute.before (cognitive 43) .opencode/plugins/inject-subagent-context.js:380— (anonymous)::tool.execute.before has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (32 pts), boolean chains 7, ternaries 1 (2 pts), error handling 1, match/switch 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.
Group.Group (cognitive 40) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:109— Group.Group has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23, ternaries 7 (9 pts), boolean chains 8 (nesting depth added 2). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 40 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 16 function literals inside it that branch (lines 261, 223, 369, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
task_store.cmd_archive (cognitive 39) .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:376— task_store.cmd_archive has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (32 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 25). 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.
add_session.update_index (cognitive 37) .trellis/scripts/add_session.py:204— add_session.update_index has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (32 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 17). 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.
index.Update (cognitive 36) src/pages/Update/index.tsx:43— index.Update has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 13 (15 pts), if/else 9, boolean chains 7, error handling 5 (nesting depth added 2). Of this number, 21 points are the body's own statements and 15 belong to 7 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
CLIAdapter.get_commands_path (cognitive 33) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:163— CLIAdapter.get_commands_path has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (28 pts), boolean chains 5 (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.
cli_adapter.detect_platform (cognitive 33) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:688— cli_adapter.detect_platform has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (21 pts), boolean chains 8, error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. 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.
index.ShortcutRecorder (cognitive 33) src/components/ShortcutRecorder/index.tsx:43— index.ShortcutRecorder has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23, ternaries 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 1). Most of this is not in the body itself: 7 of the 33 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 11 function literals inside it that branch (lines 240, 216, 287, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
useClipboardItems.useClipboardItems (cognitive 31) src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:28— useClipboardItems.useClipboardItems has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (21 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 3, ternaries 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 7). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 31 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 8 function literals inside it that branch (lines 80, 261, 239, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
index.Preference (cognitive 29) src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:70— index.Preference has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14, ternaries 7 (9 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 3 (nesting depth added 2). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 29 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 9 function literals inside it that branch (lines 203, 155, 298, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
config._parse_yaml_block (cognitive 27) .trellis/scripts/common/config.py:89— config._parse_yaml_block has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (25 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (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.
session_context.get_context_text (cognitive 27) .trellis/scripts/common/session_context.py:507— session_context.get_context_text has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (22 pts), loops 2, ternaries 1 (2 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.
trellis_config._parse_yaml_block (cognitive 27) .trellis/scripts/common/trellis_config.py:55— trellis_config._parse_yaml_block has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (25 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (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.
task.cmd_start (cognitive 26) .trellis/scripts/task.py:70— task.cmd_start has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (23 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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.
safe_commit.safe_trellis_paths_to_add (cognitive 25) .trellis/scripts/common/safe_commit.py:61— safe_commit.safe_trellis_paths_to_add has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (21 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (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.
ActionControl.ActionControl (cognitive 25) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx:100— ActionControl.ActionControl has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15, boolean chains 6, ternaries 3, error handling 1. Most of this is not in the body itself: 9 of the 25 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 323, 270, 160). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
ClipboardReader::read_with_capture (cognitive 24) src-tauri/src/clipboard/read.rs:31— ClipboardReader::read_with_capture has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (21 pts), 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.
getResearchContext (cognitive 24) .opencode/plugins/inject-subagent-context.js:90— getResearchContext has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), loops 2 (7 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 14). Of this number, 22 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 4 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
resolveSpecScope (cognitive 24) .opencode/lib/session-utils.js:202— resolveSpecScope has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 1 (2 pts) (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.
BackupImportModal.BackupImportModal (cognitive 23) src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:31— BackupImportModal.BackupImportModal has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (10 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 4, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 1). Most of this is not in the body itself: 10 of the 23 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 6 function literals inside it that branch (lines 58, 125, 76, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
packages_context.get_context_packages_text (cognitive 22) .trellis/scripts/common/packages_context.py:157— packages_context.get_context_packages_text has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), ternaries 3 (6 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
BackupExportModal.BackupExportModal (cognitive 22) src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:32— BackupExportModal.BackupExportModal has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (11 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 2). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 22 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 6 function literals inside it that branch (lines 60, 142, 78, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
add_session.main (cognitive 21) .trellis/scripts/add_session.py:499— add_session.main has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), ternaries 3 (6 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.
packages_context._resolve_scope_set (cognitive 21) .trellis/scripts/common/packages_context.py:53— packages_context._resolve_scope_set has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
task_context.cmd_list_context (cognitive 21) .trellis/scripts/common/task_context.py:172— task_context.cmd_list_context has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 2 (3 pts) (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.
task.cmd_list_archive (cognitive 20) .trellis/scripts/task.py:268— task.cmd_list_archive has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (15 pts), loops 2 (5 pts) (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.
PreferenceSection.resolveSectionVisual (cognitive 20) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSection.tsx:136— PreferenceSection.resolveSectionVisual has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17, boolean chains 3. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. 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.
workflow_phase.filter_platform (cognitive 19) .trellis/scripts/common/workflow_phase.py:171— workflow_phase.filter_platform has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), loops 2 (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.
PreferenceSettingRow.PreferenceSettingRow (cognitive 19) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSettingRow.tsx:42— PreferenceSettingRow.PreferenceSettingRow has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 15 (17 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
active_task._lookup_env_context_key (cognitive 18) .trellis/scripts/common/active_task.py:218— active_task._lookup_env_context_key has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (9 pts), loops 6 (9 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.
git_context.main (cognitive 18) .trellis/scripts/common/git_context.py:46— git_context.main has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), ternaries 1 (2 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.
(anonymous) (cognitive 18) .opencode/plugins/session-start.js:22— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8, boolean chains 6, error handling 2, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 1). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 18 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch (chat.message, event, chat.message::(anonymous)). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
add_session._auto_commit_workspace (cognitive 17) .trellis/scripts/add_session.py:323— add_session._auto_commit_workspace has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (13 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (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.
active_task.resolve_context_key (cognitive 16) .trellis/scripts/common/active_task.py:382— active_task.resolve_context_key has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), boolean chains 5, ternaries 1 (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.
PermissionControl.PermissionControl (cognitive 16) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/PermissionControl.tsx:38— PermissionControl.PermissionControl has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (9 pts), error handling 4, boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 1). Most of this is not in the body itself: 4 of the 16 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 5 function literals inside it that branch (lines 101, 50, 130, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cognitive 16) .opencode/plugins/inject-workflow-state.js:114— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6, ternaries 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 1). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 16 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function items inside it that branch (chat.message, chat.message::(anonymous)). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
readJsonlWithFiles (cognitive 16) .opencode/lib/trellis-context.js:356— readJsonlWithFiles has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
ClassTooLong: List src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:1— ClassTooLong — 654 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 14 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 254 over it, 1.64× 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· Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 43 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 43 shared lines) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:23— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:23-67 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:45-89 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:23-67 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:23-67 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:55-99 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:23-67 — These 6 members are variants of one another: a block of 43 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83-113 | .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-131 | .claude/hooks/session-start.py:188-223 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-131 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83-113 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:188-223 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-131 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:188-223 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-131 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83-113 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-131 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:188-223 — These 12 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 12 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 12 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:299— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:299-314 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:195-210 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:299-314 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:299-314 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:200-215 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:299-314 | .trellis/scripts/common/active_task.py:103-119 | .trellis/scripts/common/paths.py:211-232 — These 8 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 8 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 8 times.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/window/lifecycle/mod.rs:542— src-tauri/src/window/lifecycle/mod.rs:542-551 | src-tauri/src/window/lifecycle/mod.rs:613-622 — 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 (6–7 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs:374— src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs:374-380 | src-tauri/src/commands/clipboard.rs:410-415 — 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 × 3) src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:73— src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:73-77 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs:62-66 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/storage.rs:176-180 — before extracting anything, compare `src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs` and `src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:28— src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:28-34 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs:24-30 — before extracting anything, compare `src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs` and `src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) src-tauri/src/window/mod.rs:291— src-tauri/src/window/mod.rs:291-302 | src-tauri/src/window/mod.rs:327-338 — 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 (7 lines × 3) src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:80— src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs:80-86 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs:69-75 | src-tauri/src/clipboard/storage.rs:184-190 — before extracting anything, compare `src-tauri/src/clipboard/app_store.rs` and `src-tauri/src/clipboard/file_icon_store.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (93 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:726— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:726-818 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `.claude/hooks/session-start.py:726` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (90 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:328— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:328-417 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (80 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:688— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:688-767 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:688-767 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:688-767 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (68 lines × 2) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:224— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:224-291 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:229-296 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (66 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:191— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:191-256 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:191-256 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:191-256 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (61 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:344-404 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (59–61 lines × 2) .codex/hooks/session-start.py:469— .codex/hooks/session-start.py:469-529 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:474-532 — before extracting anything, compare `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` and `.github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 20 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 408 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `.codex/hooks/session-start.py:469` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (51–60 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/config.py:93— .trellis/scripts/common/config.py:93-152 | .trellis/scripts/common/trellis_config.py:58-108 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (53 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:605— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:361-413 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:366-418 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:605-657 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (51 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:578— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:578-628 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:578-628 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:578-628 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (50 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:517— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:517-566 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (43 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:465— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:465-507 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (41 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:421— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:421-461 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (39 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:149— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:149-187 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:149-187 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:149-187 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (37 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:648— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:648-684 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:648-684 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:648-684 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (36 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:23— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:23-58 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:45-80 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:23-58 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:23-58 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:55-90 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:23-58 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (30–31 lines × 12) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83-112 | .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-126 | .claude/hooks/session-start.py:188-218 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-126 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83-112 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:188-218 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-126 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:188-218 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-126 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:83-112 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:96-126 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:188-218 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (30 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:311-340 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (28 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:227-254 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (27 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:269— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:269-295 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (25 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276-300 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276-300 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276-300 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:276` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:144-167 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:182-204 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:558— .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:558-580 | .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:611-633 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (17–22 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/active_task.py:103— .trellis/scripts/common/active_task.py:103-119 | .trellis/scripts/common/paths.py:211-232 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (20–21 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:100— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:123-142 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:128-147 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:100-120 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (20 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:260-279 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:465— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:465-484 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:465-484 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:465-484 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (17–20 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/config.py:40— .trellis/scripts/common/config.py:40-59 | .trellis/scripts/common/trellis_config.py:26-42 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:293— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:293-311 | .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:321-339 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:293-311 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:321-339 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:293-311 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:321-339 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 3) .trellis/scripts/common/safe_commit.py:265— .trellis/scripts/common/safe_commit.py:265-283 | .trellis/scripts/common/safe_commit.py:297-315 | .trellis/scripts/task.py:365-383 — there are 3 copies across 2 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 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `.trellis/scripts/common/safe_commit.py:265` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:580— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:580-597 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:580-597 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:580-597 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:580-597 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:570— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:570-586 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:330-345 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:570-586 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:570-586 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:335-350 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:570-586 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:661— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:661-676 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:661-676 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:661-676 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:661-676 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:665— .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:665-680 | .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:699-714 | .trellis/scripts/common/task_store.py:731-746 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:289-303 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:117— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:117-131 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:117-131 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:117-131 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (13–15 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:105— .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:105-117 | .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:526-540 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:121— .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:121-135 | .trellis/scripts/common/cli_adapter.py:536-550 — 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:669— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:669-682 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:420-433 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:669-682 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:669-682 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:425-438 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:669-682 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 8) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:299— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:299-309 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:195-205 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:299-309 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:299-309 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:200-210 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:299-309 | .trellis/scripts/common/active_task.py:104-114 | .trellis/scripts/common/paths.py:217-227 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (3–11 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:692— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:692-702 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:443-445 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:692-702 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:692-702 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:448-450 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:692-702 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:135— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:135-143 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:135-143 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:135-143 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:262— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:262-272 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:262-272 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:262-272 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:632— .claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:632-644 | .cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:632-644 | .kiro/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py:632-644 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` and `.cursor/hooks/inject-subagent-context.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 436 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:78— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:78-88 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:78-88 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:78-88 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:78-88 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:78-88 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:135— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:135-140 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:135-140 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:135-140 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:135-140 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:135-140 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 5) .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:208— .claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:208-223 | .codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:208-223 | .gemini/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:208-223 | .github/copilot/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:208-223 | .kiro/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py:208-223 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` and `.codex/hooks/inject-workflow-state.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 265 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:124— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:124-142 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:124-142 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:124-142 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:124-142 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:227— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:227-232 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:227-232 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:227-232 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:227-232 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:236— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:236-252 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:236-252 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:236-252 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:236-252 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:256— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:256-265 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:256-265 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:256-265 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:256-265 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.cursor/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 26 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 691 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 6) .claude/hooks/session-start.py:707— .claude/hooks/session-start.py:707-722 | .codex/hooks/session-start.py:450-465 | .cursor/hooks/session-start.py:707-722 | .gemini/hooks/session-start.py:707-722 | .github/copilot/hooks/session-start.py:455-470 | .kiro/hooks/session-start.py:707-722 — before extracting anything, compare `.claude/hooks/session-start.py` and `.codex/hooks/session-start.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 230 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.96 — rust-toolchain.toml declares Rust 1.96 as this project's toolchain file, and Rust 1.96, superseded by 1.97 on 2026-07-09 (the Rust project patches only the current stable). An unsupported runtime receives no security patches, so every vulnerability disclosed in it since 2026-07-09 is present and unfixable without moving off it. This is a migration rather than an upgrade: there is no newer release of a runtime that has ended.
Duplication concentrated across 5 sibling directories (7 clone groups) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:427— 7 duplicated blocks under src/pages/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories Clipboard, ContextMenu, Preference, Preview, Update — 5 of them are reported below, and 2 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 7 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 7 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 7 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (124 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (124 matched lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:55— src/pages/Preference/components/BackupExportModal.tsx:55 · src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:53 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 561 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (30 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Onboarding/components/DoneStep.tsx:14— src/pages/Onboarding/components/DoneStep.tsx:14 · src/pages/Onboarding/components/WelcomeStep.tsx:14 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/CaptureOrderControl.tsx:54— src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/CaptureOrderControl.tsx:54 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/SortableCheckboxTreeControl.tsx:76 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:427— src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:427 · src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:124 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2 locations) src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:159— src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:159 · src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:185 — 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 (18 lines × 2 locations) src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:43— src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:43 · src/components/LanguageSwitcher/index.tsx:82 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:322— src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:322 · src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:74 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:129— src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:129 · src/pages/Preference/components/SourceAppsTransfer.tsx:151 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:13— src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/NumberControl.tsx:13 · src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/RetentionControl.tsx:36 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:111— src/pages/Clipboard/components/Group.tsx:111 · src/pages/Preference/components/ClipboardGroupManagerModal.tsx:54 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
Complex function handleKeyDown (cyclomatic 32, cognitive 39) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:587— handleKeyDown has cyclomatic complexity 32 and cognitive complexity 39; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function PreferenceSettingControl (cyclomatic 26, cognitive 15) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/PreferenceSettingControl.tsx:50— PreferenceSettingControl has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity· Complex function current (cyclomatic 23, cognitive 16) · ×1
Complex function current (cyclomatic 23, cognitive 16) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:522— current has cyclomatic complexity 23 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function resolveSectionVisual (cyclomatic 22, cognitive 20) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSection.tsx:136— resolveSectionVisual has cyclomatic complexity 22 and cognitive complexity 20; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function Update (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 19) src/pages/Update/index.tsx:43— Update has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function handleQuickAction (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 13) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:872— handleQuickAction has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 18, cognitive 17) src/commands/index.ts:1082— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 18 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function PreferenceSettingRow (cyclomatic 18, cognitive 17) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceSettingRow.tsx:42— PreferenceSettingRow has cyclomatic complexity 18 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function BackupImportModal (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 12) src/pages/Preference/components/BackupImportModal.tsx:31— BackupImportModal has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function isItemActionAvailable (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 3) src/constants/itemActions.ts:240— isItemActionAvailable has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 3; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function Preview (cyclomatic 14, cognitive 13) src/pages/Preview/index.tsx:62— Preview has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function getEmptyDescription (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 15) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:1117— getEmptyDescription has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function handleWindowVisibility (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 11) src/pages/Clipboard/components/List.tsx:284— handleWindowVisibility has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function settingValuesEqual (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 15) src/pages/Preference/services/preferenceSettings.ts:26— settingValuesEqual has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function handleClick (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 11) src/pages/Preference/components/settingControls/ActionControl.tsx:323— handleClick has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 13) src/hooks/useClipboardItems.ts:80— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function ClipboardCard (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) src/pages/Clipboard/components/cards/ClipboardCard.tsx:58— ClipboardCard has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function openPreviewForItem (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) src/pages/Clipboard/hooks/useClipboardPreviewController.ts:348— openPreviewForItem has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function PreferenceStorageUsagePanel (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) src/pages/Preference/components/PreferenceStorageUsagePanel.tsx:21— PreferenceStorageUsagePanel has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function Preference (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) src/pages/Preference/index.tsx:70— Preference has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Test Coverage — 0% of 125 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count
Dead file (~11 LoC) src/hooks/useWindowLifecycle.ts— no import path from any entry point (5 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
Unused dependency '@iconify-json/lets-icons' — Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Unused dependency '@iconify-json/lucide' — Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Unused dependency '@iconify-json/ph' — Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
README/code drift — Tauri version claimed (v2) vs evidence — searched for: `Tauri v2`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, Dockerfile); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift — React 19 frontend claim contradicts no component in the repo — reported by the model that read the README against this repository; no term search was run for this one, so nothing here has been checked against the tree. Treat it as a reading to confirm, not as a measured contradiction: verify it against the code before acting on it, and if the footprint it describes does exist, this row is wrong.
README/code drift — README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists — searched for: `dockerfile`, `docker-compose`, `compose.yaml`, `compose.yml`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, Dockerfile); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
Documentation: no installation or build instructions README.md— The README has no installation, build, or setup instructions; it only shows a logo and Tauri badge. Add the exact commands to run the app (cargo + tauri) and any prerequisites.
Documentation: no usage examples README.md— The README has no usage examples, so readers cannot tell how to run or interact with EcoPaste. Add a short 'how to run it' example showing the app's main screen and key actions.
No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D26 · Project Cohesion· Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 1 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `src-tauri` (19761 LoC, 208 public types across 20 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.
No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
R7 · Dead Code· Unused export 'SVG_ICON_HELP_URL' · ×1
Unused export 'SVG_ICON_HELP_URL' src/constants/urls.ts:6— Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code· Unused export 'windowLifecycleReady' · ×1
Unused export 'windowLifecycleReady' src/stores/windowLifecycle.ts:54— Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
Unused export 'isImage' src/utils/is.ts:30— Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
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.
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
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. semgrep could not parse 10 file(s) — `.release-it.ts`, `src/App.tsx`, `src/components/ScrollArea/index.tsx`, `src/components/VirtuosoScroller/index.tsx`, `src/constants/windowOpenSelection.ts`, … (+5 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.
disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
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.
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.
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.
Run 01a0ed54-3d03-7487-a8af-097ee094b58b · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 38 · Warnings: 349 · Recommendations: 15 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 29-09-2026 @ 13:21 UTC.
Downloadable artifacts
Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.