Public report of GoogleContainerTools/jib, published 24 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of
findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known
vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive reportMeasured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey →
Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 24 October 2026, 07:44 UTC · Survey ID cd_3f44fa1dde5043838316fd3d56e1afef
GoogleContainerTools/jib
Measured 24 October 2026, 07:32 UTC, at code version a600d35
No regression since the last survey
A regression is a drop of 0.5 points or more in the score, or of 2.5 or more out of 10 in a dimension, since the last survey.
CAI scoreAdequate
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Up 2 since the last survey
The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.
A medium codebase: 38,034 lines of product code in 44 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.6 person-years · Weakest lens: Maturity, 60
Findings by how serious they are
32 critical173 serious223 minor
18 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
24 October 2026, 07:32 UTC
A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number
together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee
the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that
implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.
The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸
59of 62 dimensions measured by tools. The other 3 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
415of 428 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 13 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
62dimensions across 6 lenses, read from 38,034 lines of product code in 44 projects.
GoogleContainerTools/jib scores 65 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while four of its six lenses score higher still: Architecture at 92, rated Exemplary, Code Health at 88 and Production Readiness at 71, both rated Strong, and Security and Compliance at 79, rated Adequate.
The score is lower than those four because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 60 and is rated Adequate. Its Knowledge Freshness dimension scores 0.2 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality and to raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 8 use(s) across 41,530 production line(s) (~0.2/1k), and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 65 to about 68.
32 findings are critical, all in Static Analysis (SAST).
Watchdog couldn't measure 17 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 38,034 lines, which would take an estimated 0.6 person-years, around €89,000, to rebuild.
A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.
How the score is built: what each lens counts forThe lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.
Fixed since the last survey: 47 findings
These 47 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 10 October 2026, and are gone from this one.
Test Quality · No assertions: testTo jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/ContainerizerTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testParse_pass jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/ImageReferenceTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToLayers_file jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/LayersTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToLayers_includeExcludes jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/LayersTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToLayers_properties jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/LayersTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToLayers_writeToRoot jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/LayersTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFromFile jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/blob/BlobTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFromInputStream jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/blob/BlobTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFromString jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/blob/BlobTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFromWritableContents jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/blob/BlobTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testWriteCompressed jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageWriterTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testWriteZstdCompressed jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageWriterTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testRetrieveWithTwoEntriesInCache jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testGet jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/http/FailoverHttpClientTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testPost jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/http/FailoverHttpClientTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testPut jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/http/FailoverHttpClientTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testGetManifest_oci jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/ImageToJsonTranslatorTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testGetManifest_v22 jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/ImageToJsonTranslatorTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testJsonToImageTranslatorRegex jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/JsonToImageTranslatorTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToImage_oci jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/JsonToImageTranslatorTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToImage_v22 jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/JsonToImageTranslatorTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testBuild jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/ReproducibleLayerBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testCall_badRequest jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryEndpointCallerTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testCall_forbidden jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryEndpointCallerTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testCall_methodNotAllowed jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryEndpointCallerTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testCall_notFound jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryEndpointCallerTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testCall_unauthorized jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryEndpointCallerTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToBlob_strings jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarStreamBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToBlob_stringsAndTarArchiveEntries jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarStreamBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToBlob_stringsAndTarArchiveEntriesWithCompression jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarStreamBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToBlob_stringsWithCompression jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarStreamBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToBlob_tarArchiveEntries jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarStreamBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testToBlob_tarArchiveEntriesWithCompression jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarStreamBuilderTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesTast_withConfigModifiers jib-gradle-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/FilesTaskV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesMojo_extraDirectoriesProperty jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesMojo_multiModuleComplexService jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesMojo_multiModuleSimpleService jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesMojo_singleModule jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesMojo_singleModuleWithMultipleExtraDirectories jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testFilesMojo_skaffoldConfigProperties jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2Test.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testPackageGoalsMojo_complexServiceDefault jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/PackageGoalsMojoTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testPackageGoalsMojo_complexServiceLocalProfile jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/PackageGoalsMojoTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testPackageGoalsMojo_complexServiceMultipleProfiles jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/PackageGoalsMojoTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testPackageGoalsMojo_complexServiceRemoteProfile jib-maven-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/PackageGoalsMojoTest.java
Test Quality · No assertions: testUnzip jib-plugins-common/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ZipUtilTest.java
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Rebuild cost: about €89,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€30,000 to €150,000, for 494 to 1,567 hours of work, about 0.6 person-years for 1 to 2 engineers
Difficulty of the problem
Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor
×0.9 at a score of 65. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size
Medium: 38,034 lines of product code
How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.
Top priorities
The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.
1
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Low effort · ADR Quality
2
Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 8 use(s) across 41,530 production line(s) (~0.2/1k).
More of the idioms below on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.
Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €89,000 to build again, about 0.6 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 60 (Adequate). Maturity is about how well the project explains and looks after itself, which decides whether a new developer, or a new supplier, can take over. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Maturity also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Maturity grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Maturity actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 5 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 ADR Quality findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
Architecture — module dependency graph
Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways — a layering smell or cycle. A clean layered graph has none.
Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which
The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.
13 modules, with 17 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 2 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.
Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.extension.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
10→12 com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradlepart of a loop✕
Connections
3 pairs of types, where a type in com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold uses a type in com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.
Position
Above the diagonal, so it is part of a loop. Neither module can be changed, tested or released on its own until one of these dependencies is removed.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.logging, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.logging can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.logging.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.extension.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.globalconfig.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.logging, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.logging can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.logging.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.extension.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle.skaffold.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.gradle uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.plugins.common.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold uses com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven, so a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven can break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold, while a change to com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold can't break com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.
Position
Below the diagonal: com.google.cloud.tools.jib.maven.skaffold uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
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
A05:2025 — Injection
42
High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures
6
Medium
Roadmap
First, address the lack of architectural decision records by documenting significant design choices and resolving the single missing ADR. Next, improve knowledge freshness by cleaning up the 191 orphaned files, prioritizing build.gradle and container builder classes. Then, enhance allocation hygiene on hot paths by increasing the use of allocation-aware idioms to reduce overhead. Finally, update the root README with a quick-start section to help new contributors build and run the project.
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.
Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 8 use(s) across 41,530 production line(s) (~0.2/1k). More of the idioms below on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Keep implementation types off the public surface (Java: package-private (no modifier), or leave its package out of `module-info` exports) so internals can change without breaking consumers.
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 — 32
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 — 173
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 — 223
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 18
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. 59 of 62 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 62 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, 415 of 428 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 READ here — but this repository measures it: a coverage step in CI (`jacocoTestReport`) shows that coverage is collected and tracked in your own CI. The built-in collector has no runner for this ecosystem (.java), so the analyzer could not read the number — a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not an unmeasured repo. Not scored. To have the real number read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) 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 (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) 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 (.java) and this repository declares a JVM test suite (repository root, Gradle), but it was not re-run: the analyzer environment could not run it. 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 — 67 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 29 dependency(ies) and leaving 9 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
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. A language sidecar this run needed FAILED, so the code model the non-MSBuild public-API collector reads was never built — this is a DEGRADED run, not a settled gap, and the surface may well be collectable on a re-run: The Kotlin sidecar EXITED with code 1 after 2.3s, so the Kotlin code model degraded to null. This is the sidecar's own failure, not a budget of ours.
D27 Navigability — 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. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
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.
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 reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Java is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Kotlin was found in 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.
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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in 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.
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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in 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.
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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in 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.
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.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
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.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
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 (3): D19, D21, 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.
+ 2 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 7 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with Layers.toLayers (cyclomatic 24), PluginConfigurationProcessor.computeEntrypoint (cyclomatic 24), JavaContainerBuilder.toContainerBuilder (cyclomatic 17). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 7 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.0 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
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.
+ 15 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 2 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with Layers.toLayers (cognitive 85), PluginConfigurationProcessor.computeEntrypoint (cognitive 34). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 2 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 6.6 to about 7.7/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
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 Classes8.5 / 10Strong✓ 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 10 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with JibPluginConfiguration.java, JibContainerBuilder.java, ContainerConfigurationTemplate.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with PluginConfigurationProcessor.java, StepsRunner.java, JibPluginConfiguration.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with PluginConfigurationProcessor.java. — 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.
23 duplicated block group(s) detected. 1 of the 23 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.
+ 10 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with ContainerBuilders.java, CliDockerClient.java, FilesMojoV2.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with SpringBootPackagedProcessor.java, JibContainerBuilder.java, SkaffoldSyncParameters.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with CacheStorageReader.java, GradleProjectProperties.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 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 · Coupling9.8 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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.
44 production modules (Gradle+Maven), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; edges a convention plugin adds from buildSrc or build-logic are not visible there; 1 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 11 of the 44 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).
Off the main sequence: .:jib-core
What to do
Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
Resolve the 3 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with ContainerParameters.java, Containerizer.java, ConsoleLoggerBuilder.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Cohesion (LCOM4) in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.
Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.
1375 test methods: 1375 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D10 · Test Quality9.7 / 10Stronggated by 31 serious findings✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.
Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.
6 skipped (6 with a documented reason), 31 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 1375 tests.
No assertions: testCheckEquals_pass · ×31jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:231
Resolve the 31 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with ValidatorTest.java (14), CacheStorageReaderTest.java (5), JibSystemPropertiesTest.java (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (31 warning-level).
Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").
Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.
2 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciIndexTemplate.java. Counted over 130 of the 367 production source files in this repository: 170 are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over, and the remaining 67 have no attributable history left to measure.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d16_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.
57 deducted task-comment markers across 38034 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.7. 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.
Resolve the 57 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with PullBaseImageStep.java (5), ManifestAndConfigTemplate.java (4), ReproducibleLayerBuilderTest.java (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (57 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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 and six architecture/design docs (jib-gradle-plugin, jib-maven-plugin, jib-core, jib-cli, proposals, jib-plugins-common) are all complete and well structured. The root README gives an overview of Jib as a Maven/Gradle plugin for building Docker/OCI images without a Docker daemon, with a survey link, and links to the core projects; each core project's README is focused on its own directory (e.g., jib-cli/README.md, jib-core/README.md) rather than the repository. The documentation is clear, complete, and well-organized. The repository's READMEs and architecture/Docs markdown files are all well written for the deploy tier: each document clearly states what directory it documents (examples/micronaut/, examples/multi-module/, examples/spring-boot/, jib-core/examples/) and gives a focused quickstart with shell commands. The root README is not shown, so no repository-wide overview/installation/usage/contributing/licence defect is flagged. There are two architecture/design docs: 'docs/configure-gcp-credentials.md' (GCR credential configuration) and 'docs/default_base_image.md' (default base images), both complete with the outline sections present in the body, so no missing-architecture-docs finding applies. The only unstructured element is the FAQ document, which is a wall of questions but each one is tagged by its heading ('But, I'm not a Java developer.') and the outline exists; it carries no single category defect. This README is excellent for its narrow topic — accessing a private Docker registry with a self-signed certificate via two JRE truststore approaches. It gives concrete installation steps (identifying the build-tool's JRE location via Maven and Gradle init scripts) and explains both options (create a new truststore or modify the JRE cacerts file). The document is well-structured, clearly scoped to its subject matter, and contains no defects in the listed categories.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.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 9 build units (Gradle) 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: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
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).
42 finding(s): 0 critical, 32 high, 9 medium, 1 low. 26 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 16 file(s) — `examples/dropwizard/mvnw` (lines 217–218), `examples/dropwizard/src/main/resources/dropwizard.yml`, `examples/helloworld/gradlew` (lines 144–145, line 146, line 147, …), `examples/java-agent/gradlew` (lines 144–145, line 146, line 147, …), `examples/ktor/gradlew` (lines 144–145, line 146, line 147, …), … (+11 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.
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 3 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
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 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 25 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 (25 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.
What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.
Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.
194 of 197 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java. Counted over 197 of the 367 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Most significant orphaned file · ×3jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:1
Concentrated knowledge decay
What to do
Resolve the 191 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with build.gradle (3), JibContainerBuilder.java, JavaContainerBuilder.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (191 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with PluginConfigurationProcessor.java, StepsRunner.java, MavenProjectProperties.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Concentrated knowledge decay finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d34_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.
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.
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d36_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.
Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.
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.
0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 1 end-of-life framework(s), read from 53 platform declaration(s) and 66 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 framework: Spring Boot 2examples/spring-boot/pom.xml:1
What to do
Resolve the 1 End-of-life framework finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life — start with pom.xml. — 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.
Other · Architecture — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.
Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.
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 singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.
Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.
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 interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').
Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.
`ProjectProperties` declares 18 abstract methods: `configureEventHandlers`, `createJibContainerBuilder`, `getClassFiles`, `getDefaultCacheDirectory`, `getDependencies`, `getJarPluginName`, `getMainClassFromJarPlugin`, `getMajorJavaVersion`, `getName`, `getPluginName`, `getToolName`, `getToolVersion`, `getVersion`, `isOffline`, `isWarProject`, `log`, `runPluginExtensions`, `waitForLoggingThread`. Counted over its ABSTRACT methods, once per signature; `default`, `static` and `private` methods and constants are not counted, because no implementer is forced to write them. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ProjectProperties.java:31
`RawConfiguration` declares 36 abstract methods: `getAllowInsecureRegistries`, `getAppRoot`, `getContainerizingMode`, `getCreationTime`, `getDigestOutputPath`, `getDockerEnvironment`, `getDockerExecutable`, `getEntrypoint`, `getEnvironment`, `getExpandClasspathDependencies`, `getExtraClasspath`, `getExtraDirectories`, `getExtraDirectoryPermissions`, `getFilesModificationTime`, `getFromAuth`, `getFromCredHelper`, `getFromImage`, `getImageFormat`, `getImageIdOutputPath`, `getImageJsonOutputPath`, `getJvmFlags`, `getLabels`, `getMainClass`, `getPlatforms`, `getPluginExtensions`, `getPorts`, `getProgramArguments`, `getProperty`, `getTarOutputPath`, `getToAuth`, `getToCredHelper`, `getToImage`, `getToTags`, `getUser`, `getVolumes`, `getWorkingDirectory`. Counted over its ABSTRACT methods, once per signature; `default`, `static` and `private` methods and constants are not counted, because no implementer is forced to write them. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/RawConfiguration.java:31
What to do
Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords, in this repository's Java: methods that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant or do nothing, dead `if (false)` branches, and skeleton classes most of whose methods are holes.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.
A test is skipped/ignored — coverage that looks present but never runs. Re-enable it or delete it so the green run means something. — jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/DockerRegistryBearerTokenTest.java:81
What to do
Clear the softer debt: re-enable or delete @Disabled/@Ignore tests, decide whether each empty method or UnsupportedOperationException is deliberate (and say so in a comment), and replace @SuppressWarnings("all") with targeted, justified suppressions.
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.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying 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 17 of 30 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.1 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 your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
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.
docs/faq.md links to `kubernetes.io`, but `docs/kubernetes.io` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/faq.md:785
jib-cli/README.md documents the environment variable `JIB_OPTS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — jib-cli/README.md:95
jib-gradle-plugin/README.md links to `docs/privacy.md`, but `jib-gradle-plugin/docs/privacy.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — jib-gradle-plugin/README.md:660
jib-maven-plugin/README.md links to `docs/privacy.md`, but `jib-maven-plugin/docs/privacy.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — jib-maven-plugin/README.md:742
What to do
Reconcile the README with reality: docs/faq.md links to `kubernetes.io`, but `docs/kubernetes.io` does not exist; jib-cli/README.md documents the environment variable `JIB_OPTS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; jib-gradle-plugin/README.md links to `docs/privacy.md`, but `jib-gradle-plugin/docs/privacy.md` does not exist; jib-maven-plugin/README.md links to `docs/privacy.md`, but `jib-maven-plugin/docs/privacy.md` does not exist.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.
Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.
Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
316/413 types (77%) declared in the published library are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — keep implementation types off the surface and expose only the intended API.
What to do
Keep implementation types off the public surface (Java: package-private (no modifier), or leave its package out of `module-info` exports) so internals can change without breaking consumers.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P2 · Observability5.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.
Only 5/9 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/jarTest/spring-boot`, `jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/warTest`, `jib-gradle-plugin/src/integration-test/resources/gradle/projects/spring-boot`, `jib-gradle-plugin/src/integration-test/resources/gradle/projects/war_servlet25`.
What to do
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-java or Micrometer) and a health-check endpoint (Spring Boot Actuator's /actuator/health, or a /health route) for operability.
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
Dependabot is configured but does not watch `maven` — add that `package-ecosystem` entry to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
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 · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's memory manager — buffer/slice views over copies, object pooling, stack or value-type allocation, and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.
Method: Production-source scan: density (per 1k LoC) of allocation-aware APIs — in .NET Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit; off .NET, with comments and strings blanked, Go's sync.Pool, preallocated slices/maps, Grow, strconv.Append* and buf[:0] reuse; the JVM's NIO buffer views, MemorySegment, primitive collections, pools and literal presizes (plus Kotlin primitive arrays and value classes, Scala AnyVal and @specialized); Swift's reserveCapacity, ContiguousArray, withUnsafe* access and ~Copyable. Activated off .NET on the same floor (400 lines, and benchmarks or 8 uses); Rust and garbage-collected scripting languages are not applicable. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.
What to do
Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 8 use(s) across 41,530 production line(s) (~0.2/1k). More of the idioms below on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
Java: on hot paths, work through buffer views (ByteBuffer/LongBuffer slices, MemorySegment) instead of copies, avoid boxing with primitive collections (fastutil, Eclipse Collections, HPPC, Trove), presize collections and StringBuilders, and pool expensive buffers (Netty's pooled allocator, commons-pool).
Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `NullPointerException` (Java, Kotlin, Scala), `ArgumentError.notNull` (Dart) or `ArgumentNullException` (F#'s `nullArg`) tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(p))` statements controlled by an `if`, whose condition is read for a test that is true of a NON-null `p` — an emptiness test that dereferences it (`p.Count == 0`, `!p.Any()`) or a BCL predicate documented true of the empty value (`string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)`). Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.
Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.
Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.
Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.
Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether an enhanced `for` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is iterating invalidates the fail-fast iterator it is holding, so the next `next()` throws `ConcurrentModificationException` and the remaining elements are never seen.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether Java packages are null-marked and not undermined by heavy nullness suppression — a package under `@NullMarked` (or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, or a NullAway/Checker Framework configuration naming it) makes an unannotated reference exclude null, and `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")`, `("nullness")`, `("null")` and `castToNonNull(…)` are what silence it.
Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.
~1.12 nullness suppressions per 1k Java source lines — 47 across the 41839 line(s) of the 309 Java file(s) read, counting each `@SuppressWarnings` naming `NullAway`, `nullness` or `null` once however much it covers, and each `castToNonNull(…)` call. Densest: jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/CommonCliOptions.java (29), jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Jar.java (5), jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/War.java (5). Each one tells the checker to trust the author about null, silencing the very warning the null-marking exists to produce.
What to do
Declare the default where Java declares it: `@NullMarked` (org.jspecify.annotations) in each package's `package-info.java`, or once in `module-info.java`, and run NullAway (Error Prone) or the Checker Framework so the declaration is enforced. Then annotate the real exceptions `@Nullable` and resolve the suppressions rather than adding to them: a `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")` or `castToNonNull(x)` on a value the checker could show to be null is a `NullPointerException` waiting for the path that makes it true — where the value genuinely cannot be null, say something the checker can see instead (a null check, `Objects.requireNonNull`, a non-null field initialised in the constructor).
Do you agree with this assessment?
Reference — by lens
The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.
Unscored — 2 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
P12 CI test-gate honesty — 1 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 5 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
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 — 52 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.
AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
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
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .java suite was found but not re-run
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 67 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 29 dependency(ies) and leaving 9 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — Not scored — this repository's 29 declared JVM dependency coordinate(s) were read from its 67 Maven/Gradle manifest(s), but Maven Central could not be asked for the licence of 16 of them (HTTP 429 Too Many Requests from https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/uber/nullaway/nullaway/0.10.7/nullaway-0.10.7.pom), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
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, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. 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 — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.java), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
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 — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 33 value object(s); 1 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
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#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JVM source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) 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 applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `@Benchmark` in a Java, Kotlin or Scala file importing JMH or kotlinx-benchmark, Jetpack Benchmark's `measureRepeated` in a file importing androidx.benchmark, or JMH/kotlinx-benchmark/androidx.benchmark in a pom.xml, Gradle or sbt build, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
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.
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
X12 Unreachable branch — 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
X13 Undrained process stream — 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
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — 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
X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Java was read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Java request off Android takes no token: it is cancelled through the handle it returns (Future.cancel, Call.cancel, a Disposable), ambiently (io.grpc.Context) or by interrupting its thread, not through a parameter
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — This check asks whether log calls keep a message's values apart from its text, which needs a logger that can carry them as fields. This repository's Java was read, and it logs through none that an assembled message defeats: java.util.logging's level methods, log4j 1, commons-logging, JBoss Logging and Flogger take one finished message (as log4net does in C#), or it makes no call through a named logger at all. Calls made through SLF4J or log4j 2 (`org.slf4j.Logger`, `org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger`, Lombok's `@Slf4j`) would be judged.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
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.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Instants.java:41— // TODO: copied from PluginConfigurationProcessor, find a way to share better — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Containerizers.java:71— // TODO: allow setting docker env and docker executable (along with path/env) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Containerizers.java:100— // TODO: it's strange that we use system properties to set these — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Containerizers.java:101— // TODO: perhaps we should expose these as configuration options on the containerizer — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/PlatformSpec.java:39— // TODO: reintroduce platform details when ready — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/Layers.java:176— // TODO: add logging/handling for empty layers — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/FilePropertiesStack.java:32— // TODO perhaps use a fixed size list here — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/FilePropertiesStack.java:49— // TODO: get default from FileEntriesLayer (requires buildplan release) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ArchiveLayerSpec.java:44— // TODO: arhive should maybe be a uri to support file paths or urls — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/integration-test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/ContainerizerIntegrationTest.java:52— // TODO: now it looks like we can move everything here into JibIntegrationTest. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:79— // TODO(chanseok): remove and use containerBuildPlanBuilder instead. Note that — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:87— // TODO(chanseok): remove and use containerBuildPlanBuilder instead. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:114— // TODO: Cleanup using scratch as placeholder — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PushImageStep.java:46— // TODO: figure out the right return value and type when pushing a manifest list. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PushImageStep.java:142— // TODO: a manifest list digest isn't an "image id". Figure out the right — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:137— // TODO: passing noAuthRegistryClient may be problematic. It may return 401 unauthorized — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:152— // TODO: investigate if we should just pass credentials up front. However, this involves — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:186— // TODO: consider removing this fallback branch. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:335— // TODO: pull multiple manifests (+ container configs) in parallel. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:380— // TODO: perhaps we should return multiple digests matching the platform. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/ObtainBaseImageLayerStep.java:68— // TODO: also check if cross-repo blob mount is possible. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/configuration/BuildContext.java:337— // TODO: try setting global User-Agent: here — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/hash/Digests.java:34— // TODO: BlobDescriptor is merely a tuple of (size, digest). Rename BlobDescriptor to something — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment REDACTED:318— // TODO: remove retryOnIoException and turn on/off retry based on whether it's an SSLException or — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
No assertions: testCheckEquals_pass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:231— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNotEmpty_collectionPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:79— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNotNullAndNotEmpty_stringPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:33— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullNonNullNonEmptyEntries_valuesPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:176— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullEntries_emptyPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:208— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullEntries_nullPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:202— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullEntries_valuesPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:214— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullNonEmptyEntries_emptyMapPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:111— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullNonEmptyEntries_emptyPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:170— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullNonEmptyEntries_mapWithValuesPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:117— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullNonEmptyEntries_nullMapPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:105— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNonNullNonEmptyEntries_nullPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:164— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNotEmpty_nullPass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:64— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckNullOrNotEmpty_valuePass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/ValidatorTest.java:59— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testLog_quiet_plainConsole jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/logging/CliLoggerTest.java:64— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testLog_quiet_richConsole jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/logging/CliLoggerTest.java:130— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testValidate_pass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/BuildTest.java:422— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testValidate_pass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/JarTest.java:602— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testValidate_pass jib-cli/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/WarTest.java:578— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCheckManifestPlatform_noExceptionIfDefaultAmd64Linux jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PlatformCheckerTest.java:73— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCall_ManifestList_UnknownArchitecture jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStepTest.java:655— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testVerifyImageMetadata_validOci jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReaderTest.java:622— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testVerifyImageMetadata_validOciImageIndex jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReaderTest.java:633— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testVerifyImageMetadata_validV21 jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReaderTest.java:589— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testVerifyImageMetadata_validV22 jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReaderTest.java:599— This method's body runs code, and no assertion was recognised in it. Recognised: JUnit's assertion methods (assertEquals, assertTrue, assertInstanceOf, assertThrows, assertThrowsExactly, assertTimeoutPreemptively, assertAll and the rest of JUnit 5's list), assertThat (AssertJ, Hamcrest, Truth), fail, Mockito's verify and the `assert` statement, in the test body and in helper methods of the test's own class or an in-repository base class, followed three calls deep. Verification through a helper on another object or in another class, through a custom matcher library, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
TooManyMethods: JibPluginConfiguration jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/JibPluginConfiguration.java:57— TooManyMethods — 46 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 16 over it, 1.53× 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.
TooManyMethods: JibContainerBuilder jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:69— TooManyMethods — 40 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 10 over it, 1.33× 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.
TooManyMethods: ContainerConfigurationTemplate jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/ContainerConfigurationTemplate.java:81— TooManyMethods — 38 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 8 over it, 1.27× 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.
TooManyMethods: GradleRawConfiguration jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/GradleRawConfiguration.java:31— TooManyMethods — 37 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 7 over it, 1.23× the bar. Most of these members implement common.RawConfiguration (36 of 37 members), so moving them onto a smaller type would remove them from that contract rather than reduce it. To reduce it, split the contract instead: give each cohesive group of operations its own smaller interface and its own implementing type. Where the contract has to stay whole, move the work behind these members into collaborator types, so what is left here is a forward per member rather than a responsibility per member.
TooManyMethods: MavenRawConfiguration jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenRawConfiguration.java:30— TooManyMethods — 37 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 7 over it, 1.23× the bar. Most of these members implement common.RawConfiguration (36 of 37 members), so moving them onto a smaller type would remove them from that contract rather than reduce it. To reduce it, split the contract instead: give each cohesive group of operations its own smaller interface and its own implementing type. Where the contract has to stay whole, move the work behind these members into collaborator types, so what is left here is a forward per member rather than a responsibility per member.
TooManyMethods: JavaContainerBuilder jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JavaContainerBuilder.java:45— TooManyMethods — 35 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 5 over it, 1.17× 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.
TooManyMethods: ContainerParameters jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/ContainerParameters.java:40— TooManyMethods — 35 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 5 over it, 1.17× 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.
TooManyMethods: StepsRunner jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/StepsRunner.java:68— TooManyMethods — 34 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 4 over it, 1.13× 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.
TooManyMethods: MavenProjectProperties jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:80— TooManyMethods — 32 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Containerizer jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/Containerizer.java:48— TooManyMethods — 31 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: PluginConfigurationProcessor jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:77— ClassTooLong — 610 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 29 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 210 over it, 1.53× 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.
ClassTooLong: StepsRunner jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/StepsRunner.java:68— ClassTooLong — 428 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 34 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 28 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: JibPluginConfiguration jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/JibPluginConfiguration.java:57— ClassTooLong — 405 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 46 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 5 over it, 1.01× 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.
ClassTooLong: MavenProjectProperties jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:80— ClassTooLong — 403 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 32 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 3 over it, 1.01× 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.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/ContainerBuilders.java:68— jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/ContainerBuilders.java:68-75 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Containerizers.java:80-87 — 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 (8 lines × 2) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/docker/CliDockerClient.java:281— jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/docker/CliDockerClient.java:281-288 | jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/docker/CliDockerClient.java:302-309 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/docker/CliDockerClient.java:281` 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 (8 lines × 2) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:237— jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:237-244 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:271-278 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:237` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:248` calls `getChildren` and `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:279` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:151— jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:151-159 | jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:221-228 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:221` 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/SpringBootPackagedProcessor.java:54— jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/SpringBootPackagedProcessor.java:54-60 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/StandardPackagedProcessor.java:71-77 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/StandardPackagedProcessor.java:71` 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. 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 × 2) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:668— jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:668-674 | jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:681-687 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:668` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:667` calls `setFormat`, `getFormat` and `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:680` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/SkaffoldSyncParameters.java:55— jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/SkaffoldSyncParameters.java:55-61 | jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/SkaffoldWatchParameters.java:108-114 — before extracting anything, compare `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/SkaffoldSyncParameters.java` and `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/SkaffoldWatchParameters.java` as WHOLE FILES: 82% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. 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.
Low cohesion: ContainerParameters (LCOM4 16) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/ContainerParameters.java:40— ContainerParameters's methods fall into 16 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 16 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: Containerizer (LCOM4 11) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/Containerizer.java:48— Containerizer's methods fall into 11 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 11 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: ConsoleLoggerBuilder (LCOM4 6) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/logging/ConsoleLoggerBuilder.java:26— ConsoleLoggerBuilder's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReader.java:152— jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReader.java:152-170 | jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReader.java:190-208 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageReader.java:152` 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 (19 lines × 2) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/GradleProjectProperties.java:469— jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/GradleProjectProperties.java:469-487 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:618-636 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/GradleProjectProperties.java:469` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (17 lines × 3) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:141— jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:141-157 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Jar.java:132-148 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/War.java:116-132 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:141` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (17 lines × 3) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:78— jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:78-94 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java:92-108 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildTarMojo.java:70-86 — before extracting anything, compare `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java` and `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java` as WHOLE FILES: 86% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:78` 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 (15 lines × 2) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarExtractor.java:76— jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarExtractor.java:76-90 | jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ZipUtil.java:74-88 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarExtractor.java:76` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarExtractor.java:92` calls `isSymbolicLink`, `createSymbolicLink`, `get` and `jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ZipUtil.java:89` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/TaskCommon.java:54— jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/TaskCommon.java:54-68 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MojoCommon.java:57-71 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/TaskCommon.java:54` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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.
Layers.toLayers (cyclomatic 24) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/Layers.java:56— Layers.toLayers has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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.
PluginConfigurationProcessor.computeEntrypoint (cyclomatic 24) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:590— PluginConfigurationProcessor.computeEntrypoint has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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.
JavaContainerBuilder.toContainerBuilder (cyclomatic 17) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JavaContainerBuilder.java:545— JavaContainerBuilder.toContainerBuilder has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
DefaultCredentialRetrievers.asList (cyclomatic 17) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/DefaultCredentialRetrievers.java:157— DefaultCredentialRetrievers.asList 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.
BuildDockerMojo.execute (cyclomatic 17) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:62— BuildDockerMojo.execute has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
BuildImageMojo.execute (cyclomatic 17) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java:64— BuildImageMojo.execute has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
JsonToImageTranslator.configureBuilderWithContainerConfiguration (cyclomatic 16) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/JsonToImageTranslator.java:143— JsonToImageTranslator.configureBuilderWithContainerConfiguration 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.
Layers.toLayers (cognitive 85) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/buildfile/Layers.java:56— Layers.toLayers has cognitive complexity 85 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (56 pts), loops 5 (17 pts), ternaries 2 (9 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 61). 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.
PluginConfigurationProcessor.computeEntrypoint (cognitive 34) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:590— PluginConfigurationProcessor.computeEntrypoint has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (16 pts), boolean chains 7, ternaries 3 (7 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), error handling 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
DockerConfigCredentialRetriever.retrieve (cognitive 28) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/credentials/DockerConfigCredentialRetriever.java:119— DockerConfigCredentialRetriever.retrieve has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (21 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
JsonToImageTranslator.configureBuilderWithContainerConfiguration (cognitive 25) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/JsonToImageTranslator.java:143— JsonToImageTranslator.configureBuilderWithContainerConfiguration has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (18 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), 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.
FilesMojoV2.collectWatchParameters (cognitive 25) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:268— FilesMojoV2.collectWatchParameters has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (25 pts) (nesting depth added 18). 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.
DefaultCredentialRetrievers.asList (cognitive 23) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/DefaultCredentialRetrievers.java:157— DefaultCredentialRetrievers.asList has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (20 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 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.
FilesMojoV2.collectExtraDirectories (cognitive 23) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:227— FilesMojoV2.collectExtraDirectories has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (18 pts), loops 1 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
PullBaseImageStep.call (cognitive 22) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:96— PullBaseImageStep.call has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 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.
JibPlugin.apply (cognitive 22) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/JibPlugin.java:90— JibPlugin.apply has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (21 pts), boolean chains 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.
JavaContainerBuilder.toContainerBuilder (cognitive 21) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JavaContainerBuilder.java:545— JavaContainerBuilder.toContainerBuilder has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (9 pts), loops 6 (8 pts), match/switch 1 (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.
FilesTaskV2.findProjectDependencies (cognitive 21) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/skaffold/FilesTaskV2.java:214— FilesTaskV2.findProjectDependencies has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (13 pts), loops 3 (8 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.
XdgDirectories.getOsSpecificDirectory (cognitive 20) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/filesystem/XdgDirectories.java:99— XdgDirectories.getOsSpecificDirectory has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 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.
AbstractManifestPuller.getManifestTemplateFromJson (cognitive 20) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/AbstractManifestPuller.java:136— AbstractManifestPuller.getManifestTemplateFromJson has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (20 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.
RegistryEndpointCaller.call (cognitive 20) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryEndpointCaller.java:125— RegistryEndpointCaller.call has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), error handling 3 (4 pts), 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.
MainClassFinder.find (cognitive 17) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/MainClassFinder.java:205— MainClassFinder.find has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), loops 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.
FailoverHttpClient.call (cognitive 17) REDACTED:252— FailoverHttpClient.call has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), error handling 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.
JibBuildRunner.runBuild (cognitive 17) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/JibBuildRunner.java:223— JibBuildRunner.runBuild has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 9, if/else 5 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 2). 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.
MavenProjectProperties.getJarArtifact (cognitive 17) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:519— MavenProjectProperties.getJarArtifact has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts), 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.
BuildDockerMojo.execute (cognitive 16) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:62— BuildDockerMojo.execute has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 13, if/else 2, ternaries 1. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
BuildImageMojo.execute (cognitive 16) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java:64— BuildImageMojo.execute has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 13, if/else 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.
FileTooLong: common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java— FileTooLong — 664 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 92% of them inside a single declaration: PluginConfigurationProcessor (77-1131). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 164 over it, 1.33× 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.
MethodTooLong: BuildImageMojo.execute jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java:64— MethodTooLong — execute runs 107 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 7 over it, 1.07× 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.
Duplicated block (84 lines × 3) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:97— jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:97-180 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java:111-194 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildTarMojo.java:89-172 — before extracting anything, compare `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java` and `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildImageMojo.java` as WHOLE FILES: 86% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/BuildDockerMojo.java:97` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (71–72 lines × 3) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java:123— jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java:123-194 | jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildImageTask.java:119-189 | jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildTarTask.java:141-211 — before extracting anything, compare `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java` and `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildImageTask.java` as WHOLE FILES: 85% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java:123` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 × 3) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:104— jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:104-121 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Jar.java:88-105 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/War.java:75-92 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:104` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Build.java:103` calls `getBuildFile` and `jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Jar.java:87` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java:106— jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java:106-118 | jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildImageTask.java:94-106 | jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildTarTask.java:125-137 — before extracting anything, compare `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java` and `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildImageTask.java` as WHOLE FILES: 85% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/BuildDockerTask.java:106` 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 (12 lines × 2) jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/JarLayers.java:66— jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/JarLayers.java:66-77 | jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/JarLayers.java:81-92 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/jar/JarLayers.java:66` 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 (9 lines × 2) jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/PlatformParameters.java:32— jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/PlatformParameters.java:32-40 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/JibPluginConfiguration.java:142-150 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:494— jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:494-498 | jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:525-529 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:494` 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 (109 lines × 2) jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciManifestTemplate.java:1— jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciManifestTemplate.java:1-109 | jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/V22ManifestTemplate.java:1-111 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciManifestTemplate.java:1` 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 (6 lines × 2) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/SkaffoldInitOutput.java:84— jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/SkaffoldInitOutput.java:84-89 | jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/SkaffoldSyncMapTemplate.java:133-138 — 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 (14 lines × 2) jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/warTest/src/main/java/example/HelloWorld.java:34— jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/warTest/src/main/java/example/HelloWorld.java:34-47 | jib-gradle-plugin/src/integration-test/resources/gradle/projects/war_servlet25/src/main/java/example/HelloWorld.java:34-47 — before extracting anything, compare `jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/warTest/src/main/java/example/HelloWorld.java` and `jib-gradle-plugin/src/integration-test/resources/gradle/projects/war_servlet25/src/main/java/example/HelloWorld.java` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
End-of-life framework: Spring Boot 2 examples/spring-boot/pom.xml:1— examples/spring-boot/pom.xml depends on `org.springframework.boot` at a version that pins Spring Boot 2, and Spring Boot 2.x, open-source support ended 2023-11-24. The constraint cannot admit a different major, so this repository stays on it until the declaration is edited. An end-of-life framework receives no further releases, including security releases.
Off the main sequence: .:jib-core — .:jib-core: abstractness 0.09, instability 0.00, distance 0.91 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
P12 · CI test-gate honesty· Coverage collected but not gated · ×1
Coverage collected but not gated — CI collects a coverage report but no step enforces a minimum — coverage could halve and CI stays green. Add a step that fails the build when coverage drops below a floor (your coverage tool's minimum-threshold flag, or a coverage-gate action) so the number guards something. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: this repository's CI files AND its coverage configuration — the well-known coverage and test-runner config files, read at the repository root and inside workspace package directories two levels down, so a floor declared beside the tests rather than in the pipeline is credited — matched against the threshold settings this check knows by name. A floor set in your coverage service's web UI rather than in a committed file, or under a setting whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JibContainerBuilder.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/JavaContainerBuilder.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/JibPluginConfiguration.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryClient.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/configuration/BuildContext.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-gradle-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/GradleProjectProperties.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/CacheStorageWriter.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/ImageReference.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-build-plan/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/buildplan/ContainerBuildPlan.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file REDACTED:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/Containerizer.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-build-plan/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/buildplan/FileEntriesLayer.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/configuration/ContainerConfiguration.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/CommonCliOptions.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/LocalBaseImageSteps.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/frontend/CredentialRetrieverFactory.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/skaffold/FilesMojoV2.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/JibBuildRunner.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryAuthenticator.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/Image.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/ContainerConfigurationTemplate.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/JsonToImageTranslator.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/docker/CliDockerClient.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cache/Cache.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Duplicated predicate jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/AuthenticatePushStep.java:68— `credential != null && !credential.isOAuth2RefreshToken()` appears character-identically in 3 files — jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/AuthenticatePushStep.java, jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/PullBaseImageStep.java, jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/RegistryClient.java. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarExtractor.java:64— `enableReproducibleTimestamps && Files.isDirectory(destination) && destination.toFile().list().length != 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/tar/TarExtractor.java, jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ZipUtil.java. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/frontend/CredentialRetrieverFactory.java:200— `ex.getCause() != null && ex.getCause().getMessage() != null` appears character-identically in 2 files — jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/frontend/CredentialRetrieverFactory.java, jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/credentials/DockerConfigCredentialRetriever.java. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciIndexTemplate.java:114— `manifest.platform != null && os.equals(manifest.platform.os) && architecture.equals(manifest.platform.architecture)` appears character-identically in 2 files — jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciIndexTemplate.java, jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/V22ManifestListTemplate.java. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenSettingsProxyProvider.java:69— `problem.getSeverity() == SettingsProblem.Severity.ERROR || problem.getSeverity() == SettingsProblem.Severity.FATAL` appears character-identically in 2 files — jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenSettingsProxyProvider.java, jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenSettingsServerCredentials.java. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
README/code drift docs/faq.md:785— docs/faq.md links to `kubernetes.io`, but `docs/kubernetes.io` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift jib-cli/README.md:95— jib-cli/README.md documents the environment variable `JIB_OPTS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift jib-gradle-plugin/README.md:660— jib-gradle-plugin/README.md links to `docs/privacy.md`, but `jib-gradle-plugin/docs/privacy.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift jib-maven-plugin/README.md:742— jib-maven-plugin/README.md links to `docs/privacy.md`, but `jib-maven-plugin/docs/privacy.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness· Most significant orphaned file · ×3
Most significant orphaned file jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/PluginConfigurationProcessor.java:1— One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/builder/steps/StepsRunner.java:1— One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file jib-maven-plugin/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/maven/MavenProjectProperties.java:1— One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Fat interface: ProjectProperties (18 abstract methods) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ProjectProperties.java:31— `ProjectProperties` declares 18 abstract methods: `configureEventHandlers`, `createJibContainerBuilder`, `getClassFiles`, `getDefaultCacheDirectory`, `getDependencies`, `getJarPluginName`, `getMainClassFromJarPlugin`, `getMajorJavaVersion`, `getName`, `getPluginName`, `getToolName`, `getToolVersion`, `getVersion`, `isOffline`, `isWarProject`, `log`, `runPluginExtensions`, `waitForLoggingThread`. Counted over its ABSTRACT methods, once per signature; `default`, `static` and `private` methods and constants are not counted, because no implementer is forced to write them. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Fat interface: RawConfiguration (36 abstract methods) jib-plugins-common/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/RawConfiguration.java:31— `RawConfiguration` declares 36 abstract methods: `getAllowInsecureRegistries`, `getAppRoot`, `getContainerizingMode`, `getCreationTime`, `getDigestOutputPath`, `getDockerEnvironment`, `getDockerExecutable`, `getEntrypoint`, `getEnvironment`, `getExpandClasspathDependencies`, `getExtraClasspath`, `getExtraDirectories`, `getExtraDirectoryPermissions`, `getFilesModificationTime`, `getFromAuth`, `getFromCredHelper`, `getFromImage`, `getImageFormat`, `getImageIdOutputPath`, `getImageJsonOutputPath`, `getJvmFlags`, `getLabels`, `getMainClass`, `getPlatforms`, `getPluginExtensions`, `getPorts`, `getProgramArguments`, `getProperty`, `getTarOutputPath`, `getToAuth`, `getToCredHelper`, `getToImage`, `getToTags`, `getUser`, `getVolumes`, `getWorkingDirectory`. Counted over its ABSTRACT methods, once per signature; `default`, `static` and `private` methods and constants are not counted, because no implementer is forced to write them. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 2 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/OciIndexTemplate.java, jib-core/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/image/json/V22ManifestListTemplate.java. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
No ADRs found — No ADRs found. The recognised ADR directories in this tree were read — `proposals` — and none of their files is a decision record (a README, index or template page does not count). 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 9 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 7.8/10. The most over is `jib-core` (20482 LoC, 149 module-visible types across 25 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.
Concentrated knowledge decay — 194 of 197 significant files have no living knowledge, while the repository is still being changed at a low rate (1 commit(s) in the last 90 days) — so this is one repo-wide knowledge-decay state, not 194 separate risks. Counted over 197 of the 367 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over. The code moved on without the people who understood these files: document them or schedule a read-through before the next change lands in them.
Disabled test jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/DockerRegistryBearerTokenTest.java:81— A test is skipped/ignored — coverage that looks present but never runs. Re-enable it or delete it so the green run means something.
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.
P10 · Library API & versioning· Large public API surface · ×1
Large public API surface — 316/413 types (77%) declared in the published library are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — keep implementation types off the surface and expose only the intended API.
Logging is not universal — Only 5/9 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/jarTest/spring-boot`, `jib-cli/src/integration-test/resources/warTest`, `jib-gradle-plugin/src/integration-test/resources/gradle/projects/spring-boot`, `jib-gradle-plugin/src/integration-test/resources/gradle/projects/war_servlet25`.
Nullness suppressions reduce the null-marking score — ~1.12 nullness suppressions per 1k Java source lines — 47 across the 41839 line(s) of the 309 Java file(s) read, counting each `@SuppressWarnings` naming `NullAway`, `nullness` or `null` once however much it covers, and each `castToNonNull(…)` call. Densest: jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/CommonCliOptions.java (29), jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/Jar.java (5), jib-cli/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/cli/War.java (5). Each one tells the checker to trust the author about null, silencing the very warning the null-marking exists to produce.
Skipped (documented): testFromPath_windows jib-build-plan/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/api/buildplan/AbsoluteUnixPathTest.java:47— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by a JUnit assumption
Skipped (documented): testDecode_invalidToken_actionsArray jib-core/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/registry/DockerRegistryBearerTokenTest.java:82— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: switched off by @Ignore
Skipped (documented): testCheckGradleVersion_fail jib-gradle-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/JibPluginTest.java:94— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by a JUnit assumption
Skipped (documented): testCheckGradleVersion_pass jib-gradle-plugin/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/gradle/JibPluginTest.java:75— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by a JUnit assumption
Skipped (documented): testZipSlipVulnerability_unix jib-plugins-common/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ZipUtilTest.java:66— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by a JUnit assumption
Skipped (documented): testZipSlipVulnerability_windows jib-plugins-common/src/test/java/com/google/cloud/tools/jib/plugins/common/ZipUtilTest.java:57— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by a JUnit assumption
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.
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.
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 01a16cd3-a370-7b82-98a1-1b75e26e7325 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 32 · Warnings: 173 · Recommendations: 217 · Info: 6 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 24-10-2026 @ 07:32 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.