fedit — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

The system holds an adequate standing with a health score of 65%, indicating a workable asset that carries real, compounding risks. While the architecture is robust and performance is excellent, the underlying code quality is fragile, creating a hidden tax on every change. This is not a broken system, but one that is becoming increasingly expensive and slow to maintain as it grows.

The value at stake is significant, with over 22,000 lines of production code and 13,000 lines of tests. Rebuilding this medium-sized asset would cost approximately €42,000 and take about three months for a single engineer. However, the team modifies nearly 145,000 lines annually, meaning the cost of inaction is measured in continuous drag on delivery speed rather than just the initial build cost. The weakest lens is code health, where complexity and duplication create a velocity tax that plausibly increases the effort of every modification by 8 to 18 percent.

The most critical risk is concentrated in four change-hotspots that are under-tested or owned by single individuals. These areas are fragile; a change here risks defects and outages because the safety nets are thin. This structural weakness means that routine updates carry disproportionate risk, potentially leading to delays and increased defect rates in production. The business pays for this instability through slower feature delivery and higher engineering overhead.

A genuine strength lies in the system’s architectural integrity and performance, which score near perfection. This provides a stable foundation for future improvements. However, the immediate priority must be addressing accessibility and code quality. The top-ranked fix, which involves correcting ARIA roles and states, pays for itself within one to four months by reducing the annual drag on the team. This single action offers the highest leverage, breaking even quickly and freeing up capacity for other value-adding work.

Focus first on enforcing accessibility checks in the toolchain and stabilizing the four fragile hotspots. These actions address the highest-impact risks with the best return on effort. While confidence in this assessment is high, note that domain modeling, event-driven patterns, and event sourcing were not measured, so the picture remains partial in those specific areas.

Code Health 55% Adequate · gated by D1, D2 Architecture 95% ★ Exemplary Maturity 73% Strong Readiness 77% Strong Security 82% Adequate · gated by D36 Accessibility 66% Adequate Performance 100% ★ Exemplary

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

Code Health 55% · 46% weightAccessibility 66% · 25% weightMaturity 73% · 14% weightReadiness 77% · 8% weightSecurity 82% · 4% weightArchitecture 95% · 2% weightPerformance 100% · 1% weight

Raise Code Health 55 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 65 → ~71.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

New since the last scan (4+)

4 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-18) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

D2 · prototype-v2.html.themeDemo.treeMarker (cognitive 19) docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype-v2.html
D2 · prototype.html.themeDemo.treeMarker (cognitive 19) docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype.html
D3 · FunctionTooLong: prototype-v2.html.themeDemo docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype-v2.html
D3 · FunctionTooLong: prototype.html.themeDemo docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype.html

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

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €14,000–€70,000

Cost to rebuild	€14,000–€70,000 (0.1–0.4 person-years (234–742 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	0.9× (at 65% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape	Medium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~0.3 person-years of build effort (about ~€42,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Code Health at 55% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.0) — standard service × a 0.9× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

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

Use valid, non-abstract roles, supply the ARIA state each role requires, and never put aria-hidden on a focusable element.

+3.2 pts · Medium effort · ARIA correctness

Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add an accessibility check that can read your UI — no component framework was detected and your pages are rendered by server-side templates, which neither the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins nor the HTML-template linters can parse; run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, or assert the accessibility invariants over that rendered HTML in the test suite you already have, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.

+3.2 pts · Medium effort · A11y enforcement

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.

+1.6 pts · Low effort · ADR Quality

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Fragile change-hotspots · High · Compound risk

4 hotspot file(s) are also under-tested or single-owner — change there is riskier than the headline suggests.

Evidence: D15 hotspots: 18 churn×complexity hotspot file(s) · D8 coverage: 12 file(s) under 50% coverage · D16 ownership: 0 file(s) ≥90% owned by one author · intersection: incl. Runtime.fs, Program.fs, Plugins.fs, TerminalCapabilities.fs

→ Prioritise tests + a second reviewer on the worst files (Runtime.fs, Program.fs, Plugins.fs).

The top fix pays for itself · High · Economics

The top-ranked fix costs roughly 3–10 engineer-days once. Not doing it costs about 28.7–172.2 engineer-days every year, paid as drag on the ~144,637 lines this team changes annually — a bill that arrives whether or not anyone books it. On those figures the fix breaks even in roughly 1–4 months and is free after that. Method, stated so this is not read as a quotation: debt from the ranked task's effort band; interest = annual changed lines (measured, annualised from the 90-day window) ÷ an ASSUMED 150–400 lines per engineer-day × the 8–18% drag implied by the code-quality signals; breaking point = debt ÷ annual interest. A modelled planning range built from measured inputs and one named assumption — not a quotation, a valuation, or a certified figure.

Evidence: D15 churn: 35,664 line(s) changed over a 90-day window ⇒ ~144,637/year · D1/D2/D4 code quality: averaging 4.8/10 ⇒ a 8–18% drag on each change · top-ranked remediation: Medium effort ⇒ about 3–10 engineer-day(s)

→ Do the top-ranked fix now if this code will still be yours in 4 months.

Value concentrated against a weak lens · Medium · Value at risk

This is a Medium asset (~0.3 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Code Health at 55%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.

Evidence: valuation: Medium, ~0.3 person-years rebuild (22,521 LoC) · weakest lens: Code Health 55%

→ Direct remediation budget at Code Health first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage

Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Use valid, non-abstract roles, supply the ARIA state each role requires, and never put aria-hidden on a focusable element. The rest can wait behind it.

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

→ Use valid, non-abstract roles, supply the ARIA state each role requires, and never put aria-hidden on a focusable element.

A velocity tax on every change · Medium · Economics

The code-quality signals (complexity, duplication, cohesion) average 4.8/10, which acts as a tax on every change in the weaker areas: modifications there plausibly cost on the order of 8–18% more than in clean code, and the tax compounds as the codebase grows. (A modelled estimate, not a measured fact.)

Evidence: D1/D2/D4 code quality: averaging 4.8/10 across the code-quality signals actually measured

→ Pay it down where churn is highest — the hotspots — not everywhere; that's where the tax is actually paid.

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

Architecture — module dependency matrix

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

131 modules, 114 dependencies. 1 dependency cycle across 3 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 91 more are not drawn.

Module dependency matrix. The row depends on the column; the number is how many type pairs create the dependency. A cell above the diagonal is part of a dependency cycle.
depends on →	1 Cli	2 PluginApi	5 PickerTypes	6 PromptTypes	7 Fedit	19 Commands	28 Ignore
1 Cli
2 PluginApi
3 Cli.Commands.Completions	5
4 Cli.Parser	7
5 PickerTypes					4
6 PromptTypes			1		1
7 Fedit		16	1	2
8 ActionModule					2
9 Ansi					1
10 Benchmarks					6
11 Benchmarks.FrameBench					2
12 Benchmarks.Grammar					2
13 Buffer					5
14 ChordModule		1			4
15 Cli.Commands.Keybinds	3				3
16 Cli.Commands.Plugins	5				1
17 Cli.Commands.Themes	3				2
18 ColorModule					1
19 Commands					4
20 ConfigIO					3
21 ConfigModule					2
22 Dock			3	2	3
23 Editor		3	5	2	36
24 Hex					3
25 Highlight					5
26 HostCollectorImpl		8			1
27 HostServicesModule					1
28 Ignore					1
29 ImageProtocolModule					1
30 Layout		1	6	1	7
31 Pickers			10		9
32 PluginProtocol		8			3
33 Tests.PickersTests			4	1	6
34 Tests.PluginHostTests		1			1
35 Tests.PluginsTests		3			5
36 Tests.UpdateTests		4			15
37 Cli.Commands.CommandReference	3					1
38 Runtime					12		1
39 Tests.IgnoreTests					1		1
40 Tests.WorkspaceTests					1		1

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

At a glance — Code Health · 55% · Adequate · gated by D1, D2 ·

The Good

D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 7.6 D4 · .NET / C# Code Duplication 9.7 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0

The Ugly

D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 2.7 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 2.0

At a glance — Architecture · 95% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 10.0 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.7 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0

The Bad

D27 · .NET / C# Navigability 6.8

At a glance — Maturity · 73% · Strong ·

The Good

D19 · .NET / C# Documentation Quality 8.7 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · .NET / C# Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.3 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Bad

D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 5.7 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 5.0

The Ugly

D20 · .NET / C# ADR Quality 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 77% · Strong ·

The Good

D8 · .NET / C# Code Coverage 9.7 D11 · .NET / C# Test Reliability 10.0 D12 · .NET / C# Dependency Hygiene 7.4 D13 · .NET / C# Secret Scanning 10.0 D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Ugly

P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 4.0

At a glance — Security · 82% · Adequate · gated by D36 ·

The Good

D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 10.0 D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 7.1 D30 · .NET / C# Dependency Vulnerabilities 10.0 D31 · .NET / C# IaC & Container Security 10.0 D37 · .NET / C# Vulnerability-disclosure Policy 10.0 D43 · .NET / C# Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 10.0 S1 · Repo Web-Security Posture 8.0

The Ugly

D36 · .NET / C# Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 0.0

At a glance — Accessibility · 66% · Adequate ·

The Good

AC1 · Repo Text alternatives 10.0 AC2 · Repo Forms & labels 10.0 AC3 · Repo Page structure 7.2 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 10.0

The Bad

AC5 · Repo ARIA correctness 5.4

The Ugly

AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A03:2021 — Injection	28	High / Critical

Roadmap

First, ensure ARIA correctness by using valid roles and avoiding hidden focusable elements, while establishing automated accessibility enforcement in CI using tools like axe or pa11y on rendered pages. Next, fix structural issues by adding language attributes, titles, and main landmarks, and maintain proper heading order. Finally, reduce cognitive complexity in the most complex functions and resolve long file sizes in key modules like Editor and Runtime to improve maintainability.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Use valid, non-abstract roles, supply the ARIA state each role requires, and never put aria-hidden on a focusable element.	+3.2 pts	Medium	ARIA correctness
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add an accessibility check that can read your UI — no component framework was detected and your pages are rendered by server-side templates, which neither the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins nor the HTML-template linters can parse; run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, or assert the accessibility invariants over that rendered HTML in the test suite you already have, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.	+3.2 pts	Medium	A11y enforcement
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.	+1.6 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.	+3.1 pts	Medium	Page structure
Bring the 2 bodies over 120 down to 120 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with Editor.updateCore (cyclomatic 218), Runtime.run (cyclomatic 190).	+1.3 pts	Medium	Cyclomatic Complexity
Bring the 9 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with Editor.updateCore (cognitive 281), Runtime.run (cognitive 268), Layout.renderTextEditor (cognitive 114).	+2.3 pts	High	Cognitive Complexity
Resolve the 1 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.	+1.0 pts	Low	Dependency Hygiene
Resolve the 8 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with Editor.fs, Runtime.fs, Completions.fs.	+1.9 pts	High	God Classes

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 43 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 74% mixed · 26% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
src/Fedit/Runtime.fs	5.7	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Runtime.run (cyclomatic 190)
src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs	5.7	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens)
src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs	5.9	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv (cyclomatic 18)
src/Fedit/Program.fs	6.3	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Program.main (cyclomatic 31)
src/Fedit/Editor.fs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Editor.updateCore (cyclomatic 218)
src/Fedit/View.fs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Layout.renderTextEditor (cyclomatic 39)
src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Completions.emitNushell (cyclomatic 20)
src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs	7.0	Mixed	Cognitive Complexity: Plugins.list (cognitive 35)
src/Fedit/PluginProtocol.fs	7.0	Mixed	God Classes: TooManyFunctions: PluginProtocol
src/Fedit/Config.fs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: ConfigIO.loadFrom (cyclomatic 46)
src/Fedit/Highlight.fs	7.1	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Highlight.detectLanguageWith (cyclomatic 34)
src/Fedit/Status.fs	7.1	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Status.resolveToken (cyclomatic 28)
src/Fedit/Input.fs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Input.tryMap (cyclomatic 37)
src/Fedit/Plugins.fs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Plugins.scanAndLoadWith (cyclomatic 24)
src/Fedit/Terminal.fs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Terminal.tryReadEvent (cyclomatic 17)
src/Fedit/Buffer.fs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Buffer.moveLines (cyclomatic 16)

How the grades work

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

Critical — 31

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 — 170

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 — 343

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

Could not be resolved — 41

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. 43 of 46 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 — 46 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D8D11D12D13D14D15D19D20D21D27D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D37D43D44AC1AC2AC3AC5AC6AC7AX10AX3AX4AX8M1M2M3M4P1P3P4P6PF1S1X28

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, 196 of 544 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

Method	Backs	Version	Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis	Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering	5.3.0	✓ deterministic
Native secret scanner	Hardcoded secrets / credentials	1.0.0	✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)	Code duplication	1.0.0	✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)	Line & branch coverage	10.0.400	✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnet	Outdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies	10.0.400	✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2Sharp	Churn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history	2.43.0 · 0.31.0	✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkov	Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR	1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533	✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)	Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement	Local LLM	◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a10140-dee2-7fbc-85c6-9d424b4c6ea3.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
D14 License Compliance — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. This repository declares package.json, but the licence verdict published here was taken over its NuGet package dependencies. Nothing was read about its npm dependencies' licensing in either direction, and a clean score on this card must not be read as covering them.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. A hotspot's complexity is meant to be the worst body its churn actually touched. For src/Fedit/Config.fs, src/Fedit/Dock.fs, src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs, src/Fedit/View.fs, src/Fedit/Plugins.fs, … that could not be established — the complexity reader for the file reports no body extents, or the history carries no per-line attribution — so the row quotes the file's worst body, which the counted changes may never have touched. The churn count is unaffected.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (2 contributor(s) across 349 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 99% of the history; the other 1 hold 1% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
D26 Project Cohesion — 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. Project size and spread are measured over build units (a .NET project, a Maven or Gradle module, an npm, Deno or JSR package, a Go module, a Cargo crate, a Python, Composer, Bundler, Mix, rebar3, sbt, SwiftPM or pub package, an OTP application, an Xcode project or XcodeGen spec) whose source a code model reads. This repository's production source is in a language no model reads, or in units whose build tool D26 does not recognise. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository's projects are cohesive.
D39 IL Efficiency — 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. IL NOT MEASURED: the analyzer's build of this repository exited 1 and the cause could not be attributed, so no assemblies were produced and there was no IL to read. We do not read it as a defect in the repository: an unattributed failure leans OURS. D18 owns the question of whether this repository builds; it was not answered here.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection registrations in C# and Spring beans in Java/Kotlin only, and no container it models, or knows cannot hold a captive, was found in this repository's source, 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.
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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P2 Observability — 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. Observability was not assessed: this check recognises the logging, tracing/metrics and health-check idioms of .NET, the JVM, Go, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Rust, Ruby, PHP, Swift, Dart, Elixir and Erlang, and most of this repository's production source is in none of them. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repo lacks structured logging. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
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.
P8 Schema migrations — 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 EF Core usage in C# and the schema tooling its file scan recognises only, and no .NET project was loaded, and this repository's language is not one the scan models, 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.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Those languages have allocation-aware idioms of their own, but this check does not read them yet. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the code is careless with allocations.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

Repo exclusion declarations: 35 pattern(s) declared (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code) excluded 0 source file(s) from code-quality scoring. Declarations are the repo's own visible statement that a tree is machine-written or vendored — auditable in any diff, honored by GitHub the same way.

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.
D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
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").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
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.
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.
D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
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.
AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
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.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity2.7 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

43 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was Editor.updateCore at 218. A further 8 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being Keybinds.actionMeta at 82 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 3 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: src/Fedit/Actions.fs (ActionModule.name at 82), src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs (Keybinds.actionMeta at 82), src/Fedit/LspTypes.fs (LanguageServers.languageIdFor at 16). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

Editor.updateCore (cyclomatic 218)src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3717

Runtime.run (cyclomatic 190)src/Fedit/Runtime.fs:418

Editor.runDefaultAction (cyclomatic 113)src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2657

KeymapModule.parseAction (cyclomatic 98)src/Fedit/Keymap.fs:446

Editor.executeCommand (cyclomatic 83)src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2359

+ 38 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Bring the 2 bodies over 120 down to 120 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with Editor.updateCore (cyclomatic 218), Runtime.run (cyclomatic 190). — 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 Cyclomatic Complexity from 2.7 to about 3.9/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 120; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

63 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was Editor.updateCore at 281.

Editor.updateCore (cognitive 281)src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3717

Runtime.run (cognitive 268)src/Fedit/Runtime.fs:418

Layout.renderTextEditor (cognitive 114)src/Fedit/View.fs:357

ConfigIO.loadFrom (cognitive 80)src/Fedit/Config.fs:78

Layout.renderHexEditor (cognitive 75)src/Fedit/View.fs:209

+ 58 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Bring the 9 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with Editor.updateCore (cognitive 281), Runtime.run (cognitive 268), Layout.renderTextEditor (cognitive 114). — 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 9 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 2.0 to about 4.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; 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 Classes7.6 / 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.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

12 over-large unit(s) detected — types, modules or files that carry too much.

FileTooLong: Fedit/Editor.fs · ×8src/Fedit/Editor.fs

FunctionTooLong: prototype-v2.html.themeDemo · ×2docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype-v2.html:977

TooManyFunctions: PluginProtocol · ×2src/Fedit/PluginProtocol.fs:17

What to do

Resolve the 8 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with Editor.fs, Runtime.fs, Completions.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with prototype-v2.html, prototype.html. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 TooManyFunctions finding(s) in God Classes — start with PluginProtocol.fs, LspWire.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.7 / 10Stronggated by 14 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

13 duplicated block group(s) detected. One further row reports members as variants of one another; it aggregates block groups already counted above and is not itself counted.

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×2src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2362

Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens)src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:7

Duplicated block (13–18 lines × 2)src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:208

Duplicated block (11–17 lines × 3)src/Fedit/Themes.fs:312

Duplicated block (15–16 lines × 4)src/Fedit/Themes.fs:174

+ 8 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Editor.fs, Commands.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with CommandReference.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (13–18 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Keybinds.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

5 projects, 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on project(s).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D8 · Code Coverage9.7 / 10Stronggated by 12 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How much of the code is actually exercised by tests.

Method: Coverage from coverlet runs or committed reports (Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov), computed per-file with structured exclusions for generated, trivial, and glue code. When the suite can't be built/run in-image AND no report is committed, coverage is reported NOT-MEASURED (excluded from the score) with the precondition to make it measurable — never a LoC-ratio proxy folded in as if measured. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

Line coverage 70.8% — 12 file(s) below 50%.

Low coverage: src/Fedit/LspClient.fs · ×12src/Fedit/LspClient.fs

What to do

Resolve the 12 Low coverage finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with LspClient.fs, Program.fs, CommandReference.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 warning-level).
Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d8_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 flaky across 1 measured tier(s). unit: measured (0 flaky).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d11_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D12 · Dependency Hygiene7.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.

Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.

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

2 outdated, 0 vulnerable, 1 deprecated packages. Those are the NuGet packages; this repository's npm dependencies were read too — 333 outdated of 584 package(s) across 1 lockfile(s).

Deprecated: xunit

Outdated (npm): @alpinejs/focus · ×333

Outdated: coverlet.collector · ×2

What to do

Resolve the 1 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D14 · License Compliance10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.

Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.

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

0 of 142 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 9 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 133 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution. ★ COVERAGE OF THIS VERDICT: it grades this repository's NuGet package dependencies and nothing else. The repository also declares package.json, and the licences of those dependencies were NOT read by this pass — a gap in this engine's coverage, not a statement about them. So this result says the graded closure carries no banned licence; it does NOT say this repository's licensing is clear.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots5.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Top hotspots: src/Fedit/Editor.fs (41×218=8938); src/Fedit/Runtime.fs (34×190=6460); src/Fedit/Keymap.fs (16×98=1568)

Hotspot: src/Fedit/Editor.fs · ×18src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3717

What to do

Resolve the 18 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with Editor.fs, Runtime.fs, Keymap.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README (fedit) is clear and complete — it introduces the project, shows a live demo, gives install/run commands for each OS, and documents brand assets. The brand/themes/README is focused on its own directory (fedit themes), not the repo, so it does not contradict the overview. The docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/README is an internal planning artifact that is clipped mid-tablet; no section is missing from the visible outline. All four READMEs are well-structured with headings and a clear ordering. The documentation is excellent for a project focused on plugin development and extensibility — the READMEs describe each directory's purpose, architecture/implementation plans are exhaustive with task-by-task checklists, and there is a dedicated archived-plans repository that documents every planned feature. The visible content is complete: the mouse-support README covers what works today, the plugin-action expansion plan details current surface, the plugin-api implementation plan explains architecture, file structure, and a 2026-05-19 companion spec, and the unified-color-type document lists context, prior art, design, and all four tasks. The visible content is unclipped; no missing sections appear to be penalized by truncation. A comprehensive research and implementation-plan repository documenting fedit's keybindings/macros, mouse-viewport scrolling, docs-subsite/changelog grid, style generalization sweep, and syntax-highlighting approaches. The content is well organized with a clear overview for each plan (status, goals, architecture), an outline of every named section, and cross-referenced design documents.

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.7/10. — The repository's root README (fedit) is clear and complete — it introduces the project, shows a live demo, gives install/run commands for each OS, and documents brand assets. The brand/themes/README is focused on its own directory (fedit themes), not the repo, so it does not contradict the overview. The docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/README is an internal planning artifact that is clipped mid-tablet; no section is missing from the visible outline. All four READMEs are well-structured with headings and a clear ordering. The documentation is excellent for a project focused on plugin development and extensibility — the READMEs describe each directory's purpose, architecture/implementation plans are exhaustive with task-by-task checklists, and there is a dedicated archived-plans repository that documents every planned feature. The visible content is complete: the mouse-support README covers what works today, the plugin-action expansion plan details current surface, the plugin-api implementation plan explains architecture, file structure, and a 2026-05-19 companion spec, and the unified-color-type document lists context, prior art, design, and all four tasks. The visible content is unclipped; no missing sections appear to be penalized by truncation. A comprehensive research and implementation-plan repository documenting fedit's keybindings/macros, mouse-viewport scrolling, docs-subsite/changelog grid, style generalization sweep, and syntax-highlighting approaches. The content is well organized with a clear overview for each plan (status, goals, architecture), an outline of every named section, and cross-referenced design documents.

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.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d20_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D27 · Navigability6.8 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps.

Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

84 % of calls cross a namespace and 3 % go through an interface, but 27 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.

Scattered collaborators

What to do

Resolve the 1 Scattered collaborators finding(s) in Navigability. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)7.1 / 10Adequategated by 28 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

28 finding(s): 0 critical, 28 high, 0 medium, 0 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 1 file(s) — `scripts/render-formula.sh` (line 15, line 16) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 3 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 26 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 (26 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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

No known-vulnerable dependencies in any ecosystem this repository declares.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether Dockerfiles / Terraform / Kubernetes config follow security best practices.

Method: IaC/container misconfiguration scan via trivy config (Dockerfile/Terraform/K8s/Helm/CloudFormation); severity rules to 0-10 moderate normalizer. NotApplicable without manifests. Exhaustive, deterministic.

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

trivy and checkov found no infrastructure-as-code or container misconfigurations.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 46 of the 52 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

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

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d37_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 5 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AC1 · Text alternatives10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether non-text content carries a text alternative — img/area/input[type=image] have alt, a meaningful svg has a title or aria-label, video has a captions track, and object/embed/canvas have a name or fallback content. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: every img/area/input[type=image] checked for alt, svg[role=img] for a title/aria-label, video for a captions <track>. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: image/media elements — img, area, input[type=image], svg, video, object, embed, canvas — across the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and dynamic-attribute elements are skipped. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is NOT read by any producer, so it contributes no element to this population; where such a frontend is present the card discloses it as an analyzer gap rather than scoring around it.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC2 · Forms & labels10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.

Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC3 · Page structure7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language (well-formed BCP-47) and a non-empty title, expose exactly one main landmark and a sane heading order with non-empty headings, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes, give data tables header cells, and avoid meta-refresh. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: html lang, document <title>, a main landmark and heading order on full documents only, plus zoom-disabling viewports, untitled iframes and meta-refresh anywhere. Deterministic, per structural checkpoint.

Coverage: Population: the PARSED MARKUP documents (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx). The page-level checks — lang, title, single main landmark — fire ONCE PER FULL DOCUMENT (an <html> root) and never on a partial or component fragment, so a repo of fragments is assessed only on the per-element checks (heading order, table headers, iframe titles, meta-refresh, zoom). Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — design/modality-explorer.html:2
Skipping heading levels breaks the document outline assistive tech relies on. Don't jump levels — increase by at most one. — design/modality-explorer.html:623

What to do

Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC5 · ARIA correctness5.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: role values checked against the WAI-ARIA role set (abstract/invalid flagged), required ARIA state for a role, and aria-hidden on a focusable element. Deterministic, role/attribute level.

Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

"sortAria('stroke')" is not a valid value for aria-sort — allowed: ascending, descending, none, other. — website/src/pages/docs/keybindings.astro:68
"sortAria('action')" is not a valid value for aria-sort — allowed: ascending, descending, none, other. — website/src/pages/docs/keybindings.astro:73
"sortAria('context')" is not a valid value for aria-sort — allowed: ascending, descending, none, other. — website/src/pages/docs/keybindings.astro:78

What to do

Use valid, non-abstract roles, supply the ARIA state each role requires, and never put aria-hidden on a focusable element.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC6 · Visual & motion safety10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS literals are read (hex/rgb/hsl/named), never computed/runtime/external-CDN colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup/CSS scan: inline outline:none/0, literal inline colour/background contrast against the 4.5:1 AA floor, and <style>-block animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard. Deterministic but PARTIAL — only inline styles and in-repo CSS literals are visible.

Coverage: Population: styled elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx), plus in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files and CSS-in-JS literals. Colour contrast is computed from LITERAL colour pairs only (hex/rgb/hsl/named, including var() tokens and Tailwind neutral utilities) — computed, runtime-themed and external-CDN colour is never resolved, so this is a partial read of contrast by construction. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.

Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.

Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.

No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (an accessibility check that can read your UI — no component framework was detected and your pages are rendered by server-side templates, which neither the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins nor the HTML-template linters can parse; run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, or assert the accessibility invariants over that rendered HTML in the test suite you already have) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start by running that check over your rendered pages in CI. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 26 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add an accessibility check that can read your UI — no component framework was detected and your pages are rendered by server-side templates, which neither the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins nor the HTML-template linters can parse; run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, or assert the accessibility invariants over that rendered HTML in the test suite you already have, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX4 · Dependency direction10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX8 · Test isolation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether production projects stay free of references to test projects — tests may depend on production, never the reverse.

Method: Csproj graph: each production project checked for references to test projects (identified by test-framework presence, not name). Zero violations is clean. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)7.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
Add a README to the 1 of 1 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.

What to do

Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add `semgrep --config=auto` plus gitleaks for committed secrets (F# is not a CodeQL language and has no language-specific SAST engine) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 30496 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: `semgrep --config=auto` plus gitleaks for committed secrets (F# is not a CodeQL language and has no language-specific SAST engine) — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Dependabot is configured but does not watch `npm`, `gitsubmodule` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF1 · Benchmark discipline10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code protects its performance with benchmarks — a benchmark suite, allocation/memory measurement, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.

Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI; off .NET, the same ladder over Go testing.B, Rust criterion/#[bench]/divan, JMH/kotlinx-benchmark, pytest-benchmark/asv/pyperf, tinybench/mitata/vitest bench/benchmark.js and Swift package-benchmark — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

Do you agree with this assessment?

S1 · Web-Security Posture8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Only what this repository's own non-C# files could be read for was assessed — and because this repository commits the configuration that serves its own HTTP surface, that configuration could be read in full for the security response headers it sets. Nothing else in this dimension was assessed: the transport, cookie, input-validation and crypto controls are read from a source model that was not loaded for this repository’s language, so their absence here is not a finding about this repository.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. Deterministic.

No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. This is reported because `vercel.json` configures this repository's static hosting, including its response headers, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.) — website/vercel.json:1

What to do

Set security response headers on the surface this repository serves: an `add_header` directive per header in the nginx/Caddy/Apache config, a `_headers` / `vercel.json` / `netlify.toml` entry for a static host, or `helmet()` in the HTTP server. `Content-Security-Policy` is the one that pays for itself first — it is what contains an injected script once one reaches the page — followed by `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff` and a frame policy (`X-Frame-Options: DENY`, or CSP `frame-ancestors`). Where the app is served from a build container, the header configuration belongs in the image beside the built assets, so it ships with them rather than depending on where it lands.

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?

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 13 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (24%; ≈26% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 42 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

Dimension	WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria	Coverage
AC1 · Text alternatives	1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5	Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels	1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure	1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness	4.1.2	Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety	1.4.3, 2.4.7	Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcement	enforcement — no page criterion	Enforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 42 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	55%	Adequate — gated by D1, D2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture	95%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	73%	Strong	Solid.
Readiness	77%	Strong	Solid.
Security	82%	Adequate — gated by D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility	66%	Adequate	Acceptable, with room to improve.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.

Unscored — 1 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.

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 — 69 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.

AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No function in this Python code is served by a threaded web framework (a Flask, Bottle or FastAPI route, a Django or Pyramid view), so no module is shared between request threads. TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — no exported interface declares behaviour
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~13616 lines of test source are present (.fs) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D17 Explicit Debt — the C# workspace loaded 0 projects, so explicit-debt density could not be measured
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a C#/VB .NET solution; this repository's .NET projects are all F# (.fsproj), which the C#/VB workspace does not load, so the dimension does not apply.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D26 Project Cohesion — D26 measured no build unit over this repository's .fs source. 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 — IL not measured — the analyzer's build of the target did not succeed
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — D6 reads a CS/VB/GO/SCALA/SWIFT/DART/JAVA/PY/KT/TS/TSX/MTS/CTS/JS/JSX/MJS/CJS/PHP/RB/RS/ERL/EX/EXS class graph only — this repository's production source is .fs, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.fs) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so its unit/integration/BDD/E2E split couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 98 value object(s); 11 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# and JavaScript/TypeScript, and neither was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P2 Observability — Observability was not assessed: this check recognises the logging, tracing/metrics and health-check idioms of .NET, the JVM, Go, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Rust, Ruby, PHP, Swift, Dart, Elixir and Erlang, and most of this repository's production source is in none of them. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repo lacks structured logging. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not measured — the application kind could not be determined for this repo
P8 Schema migrations — 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
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Cobertura — `dotnet test --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` with a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference) 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
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Allocation awareness was not assessed: this repository holds F#, whose allocation-aware idioms this check does not model yet. That is a gap in the analyzer's language reach, not a finding about your code.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 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.

Critical — 31 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 1 more in this group — see findings.md.

AC5 · ARIA correctness · Invalid value "sortAria('stroke')" for aria-sort · ×1

Invalid value "sortAria('stroke')" for aria-sort website/src/pages/docs/keybindings.astro:68 — "sortAria('stroke')" is not a valid value for aria-sort — allowed: ascending, descending, none, other.

AC5 · ARIA correctness · Invalid value "sortAria('action')" for aria-sort · ×1

Invalid value "sortAria('action')" for aria-sort website/src/pages/docs/keybindings.astro:73 — "sortAria('action')" is not a valid value for aria-sort — allowed: ascending, descending, none, other.

AC5 · ARIA correctness · Invalid value "sortAria('context')" for aria-sort · ×1

Invalid value "sortAria('context')" for aria-sort website/src/pages/docs/keybindings.astro:78 — "sortAria('context')" is not a valid value for aria-sort — allowed: ascending, descending, none, other.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

Serious — 170 finding(s)

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×18

Hotspot: src/Fedit/Editor.fs src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3717 — src/Fedit/Editor.fs changed 41 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 218 in Editor.updateCore at line 3717. 7 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 34 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Editor.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Runtime.fs src/Fedit/Runtime.fs:418 — src/Fedit/Runtime.fs changed 34 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 190 in Runtime.run at line 418. 8 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 26 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Runtime.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Keymap.fs src/Fedit/Keymap.fs:446 — src/Fedit/Keymap.fs changed 16 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 98 in KeymapModule.parseAction at line 446. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 15 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Keymap.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Actions.fs src/Fedit/Actions.fs:163 — src/Fedit/Actions.fs changed 13 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 82 in ActionModule.name at line 163. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 12 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Actions.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:28 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs changed 12 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 82 in Keybinds.actionMeta at line 28. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 11 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Highlight.fs src/Fedit/Highlight.fs:292 — src/Fedit/Highlight.fs changed 9 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 68 in Highlight.resolveCapture at line 292. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Highlight.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Config.fs src/Fedit/Config.fs:78 — src/Fedit/Config.fs changed 11 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 46 in ConfigIO.loadFrom at line 78. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 10 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Config.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/View.fs src/Fedit/View.fs:357 — src/Fedit/View.fs changed 11 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 39 in Layout.renderTextEditor at line 357. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 10 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/View.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Dock.fs src/Fedit/Dock.fs:75 — src/Fedit/Dock.fs changed 10 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 31 in Dock.panel at line 75. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Dock.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/PluginWire.fs src/Fedit/PluginWire.fs:289 — src/Fedit/PluginWire.fs changed 7 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 33 in PluginWire.readAction at line 289. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/PluginWire.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Status.fs src/Fedit/Status.fs:159 — src/Fedit/Status.fs changed 7 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 28 in Status.resolveToken at line 159. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Status.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Program.fs src/Fedit/Program.fs:114 — src/Fedit/Program.fs changed 6 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 31 in Program.main at line 114. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Program.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Plugins.fs src/Fedit/Plugins.fs:645 — src/Fedit/Plugins.fs changed 7 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 24 in Plugins.scanAndLoadWith at line 645. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Plugins.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Commands.fs src/Fedit/Commands.fs:472 — src/Fedit/Commands.fs changed 8 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 17 in Commands.completionsWith at line 472. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Commands.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/LspTypes.fs src/Fedit/LspTypes.fs:190 — src/Fedit/LspTypes.fs changed 3 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 16 in LanguageServers.languageIdFor at line 190. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/LspTypes.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs:272 — src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs changed 2 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 20 in TerminalCapabilitiesModule.toLogString at line 272. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:647 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs changed 2 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 20 in Completions.emitNushell at line 647. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/Fedit/Terminal.fs src/Fedit/Terminal.fs:305 — src/Fedit/Terminal.fs changed 2 times in last 90 days, max cyclomatic complexity 17 in Terminal.tryReadEvent at line 305. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-11..2026-09-09, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-11 17:16:22 +02:00' --until='2026-09-09 17:16:22 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Fedit/Terminal.fs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D8 · Code Coverage · Low coverage · ×12

Low coverage: src/Fedit/LspClient.fs src/Fedit/LspClient.fs — 0.0% line coverage (0/244).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/Program.fs src/Fedit/Program.fs — 0.0% line coverage (0/169).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs — 19.4% line coverage (14/72).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs — 47.7% line coverage (53/111).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs — 0.0% line coverage (0/259).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/Runtime.fs src/Fedit/Runtime.fs — 6.0% line coverage (67/1117).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/KeymapIO.fs src/Fedit/KeymapIO.fs — 12.5% line coverage (1/8).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/PluginProtocol.fs src/Fedit/PluginProtocol.fs — 42.3% line coverage (164/388).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/KittyImage.fs src/Fedit/KittyImage.fs — 0.0% line coverage (0/88).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/ImageProtocol.fs src/Fedit/ImageProtocol.fs — 0.0% line coverage (0/5).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/MouseProtocol.fs src/Fedit/MouseProtocol.fs — 47.4% line coverage (55/116).
Low coverage: src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs — 16.1% line coverage (24/149).

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×8

FileTooLong: Fedit/Editor.fs src/Fedit/Editor.fs — FileTooLong — 3621 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 150 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 3121 over it, 7.24× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Fedit/Runtime.fs src/Fedit/Runtime.fs — FileTooLong — 1164 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 664 over it, 2.33× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Commands/Completions.fs src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs — FileTooLong — 846 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 41 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 346 over it, 1.69× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Fedit/View.fs src/Fedit/View.fs — FileTooLong — 778 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 33 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 278 over it, 1.56× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Fedit/Plugins.fs src/Fedit/Plugins.fs — FileTooLong — 597 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 97 over it, 1.19× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Fedit/Highlight.fs src/Fedit/Highlight.fs — FileTooLong — 544 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 44 over it, 1.09× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Fedit/Pickers.fs src/Fedit/Pickers.fs — FileTooLong — 521 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 40 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 21 over it, 1.04× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Fedit/Config.fs src/Fedit/Config.fs — FileTooLong — 504 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 4 over it, 1.01× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×2

FunctionTooLong: prototype-v2.html.themeDemo docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype-v2.html:977 — FunctionTooLong — themeDemo runs 473 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 373 over it, 4.73× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: prototype.html.themeDemo docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype.html:861 — FunctionTooLong — themeDemo runs 448 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 348 over it, 4.48× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyFunctions · ×2

TooManyFunctions: PluginProtocol src/Fedit/PluginProtocol.fs:17 — TooManyFunctions — 48 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 18 over it, 1.60× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: LspWire src/Fedit/LspWire.fs:31 — TooManyFunctions — 33 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 3 over it, 1.10× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.

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

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2362 — src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2362-2369 | src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2407-2414 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Commands.fs:279 — src/Fedit/Commands.fs:279-288 | src/Fedit/Commands.fs:332-339 — 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 `src/Fedit/Commands.fs:279` 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. 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.

AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×1

Page without a main landmark design/modality-explorer.html:2 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>.

AC3 · Page structure · Heading level jumps from h2 to h4 · ×1

Heading level jumps from h2 to h4 design/modality-explorer.html:623 — Skipping heading levels breaks the document outline assistive tech relies on. Don't jump levels — increase by at most one.

AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1

Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (an accessibility check that can read your UI — no component framework was detected and your pages are rendered by server-side templates, which neither the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins nor the HTML-template linters can parse; run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, or assert the accessibility invariants over that rendered HTML in the test suite you already have) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start by running that check over your rendered pages in CI. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 26 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.updateCore (cyclomatic 218) · ×1

Editor.updateCore (cyclomatic 218) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3717 — Editor.updateCore has cyclomatic complexity 218 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Runtime.run (cyclomatic 190) · ×1

Runtime.run (cyclomatic 190) src/Fedit/Runtime.fs:418 — Runtime.run has cyclomatic complexity 190 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.runDefaultAction (cyclomatic 113) · ×1

Editor.runDefaultAction (cyclomatic 113) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2657 — Editor.runDefaultAction has cyclomatic complexity 113 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · KeymapModule.parseAction (cyclomatic 98) · ×1

KeymapModule.parseAction (cyclomatic 98) src/Fedit/Keymap.fs:446 — KeymapModule.parseAction has cyclomatic complexity 98 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.executeCommand (cyclomatic 83) · ×1

Editor.executeCommand (cyclomatic 83) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2359 — Editor.executeCommand has cyclomatic complexity 83 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.runPrompt (cyclomatic 49) · ×1

Editor.runPrompt (cyclomatic 49) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3438 — Editor.runPrompt has cyclomatic complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ConfigIO.loadFrom (cyclomatic 46) · ×1

ConfigIO.loadFrom (cyclomatic 46) src/Fedit/Config.fs:78 — ConfigIO.loadFrom has cyclomatic complexity 46 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.applyPluginActions (cyclomatic 42) · ×1

Editor.applyPluginActions (cyclomatic 42) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:1889 — Editor.applyPluginActions has cyclomatic complexity 42 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.executePickerAction (cyclomatic 41) · ×1

Editor.executePickerAction (cyclomatic 41) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2164 — Editor.executePickerAction has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Layout.renderTextEditor (cyclomatic 39) · ×1

Layout.renderTextEditor (cyclomatic 39) src/Fedit/View.fs:357 — Layout.renderTextEditor has cyclomatic complexity 39 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Input.tryMap (cyclomatic 37) · ×1

Input.tryMap (cyclomatic 37) src/Fedit/Input.fs:83 — Input.tryMap has cyclomatic complexity 37 (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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.hexInterceptAction (cyclomatic 37) · ×1

Editor.hexInterceptAction (cyclomatic 37) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:1673 — Editor.hexInterceptAction has cyclomatic complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Layout.renderHexEditor (cyclomatic 36) · ×1

Layout.renderHexEditor (cyclomatic 36) src/Fedit/View.fs:209 — Layout.renderHexEditor has cyclomatic complexity 36 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Highlight.detectLanguageWith (cyclomatic 34) · ×1

Highlight.detectLanguageWith (cyclomatic 34) src/Fedit/Highlight.fs:455 — Highlight.detectLanguageWith has cyclomatic complexity 34 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: Highlight.resolveCapture (cyclomatic 68) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · PluginWire.readAction (cyclomatic 33) · ×1

PluginWire.readAction (cyclomatic 33) src/Fedit/PluginWire.fs:289 — PluginWire.readAction has cyclomatic complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · PluginWire.writeAction (cyclomatic 32) · ×1

PluginWire.writeAction (cyclomatic 32) src/Fedit/PluginWire.fs:66 — PluginWire.writeAction has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Program.main (cyclomatic 31) · ×1

Program.main (cyclomatic 31) src/Fedit/Program.fs:114 — Program.main has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Dock.panel (cyclomatic 31) · ×1

Dock.panel (cyclomatic 31) src/Fedit/Dock.fs:75 — Dock.panel has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Input.tryParseAnsiSequence (cyclomatic 28) · ×1

Input.tryParseAnsiSequence (cyclomatic 28) src/Fedit/Input.fs:171 — Input.tryParseAnsiSequence has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Status.resolveToken (cyclomatic 28) · ×1

Status.resolveToken (cyclomatic 28) src/Fedit/Status.fs:159 — Status.resolveToken has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.runPromptListSession (cyclomatic 27) · ×1

Editor.runPromptListSession (cyclomatic 27) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3376 — Editor.runPromptListSession has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Layout.render (cyclomatic 25) · ×1

Layout.render (cyclomatic 25) src/Fedit/View.fs:884 — Layout.render has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Plugins.scanAndLoadWith (cyclomatic 24) · ×1

Plugins.scanAndLoadWith (cyclomatic 24) src/Fedit/Plugins.fs:645 — Plugins.scanAndLoadWith has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Parser.parse (cyclomatic 23) · ×1

Parser.parse (cyclomatic 23) src/Fedit/Cli.fs:159 — Parser.parse has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Layout.renderPicker (cyclomatic 23) · ×1

Layout.renderPicker (cyclomatic 23) src/Fedit/View.fs:659 — Layout.renderPicker has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Layout.renderCompletionOverlay (cyclomatic 22) · ×1

Layout.renderCompletionOverlay (cyclomatic 22) src/Fedit/View.fs:761 — Layout.renderCompletionOverlay has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.emitNushell (cyclomatic 20) · ×1

Completions.emitNushell (cyclomatic 20) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:647 — Completions.emitNushell has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.run (cyclomatic 20) · ×1

Completions.run (cyclomatic 20) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:1190 — Completions.run has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.emitPwsh (cyclomatic 19) · ×1

Completions.emitPwsh (cyclomatic 19) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:487 — Completions.emitPwsh has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv (cyclomatic 18) · ×1

TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv (cyclomatic 18) src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs:116 — TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: TerminalCapabilitiesModule.toLogString (cyclomatic 20) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.emitFishNode (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

Completions.emitFishNode (cyclomatic 17) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:427 — Completions.emitFishNode has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.emitXonsh (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

Completions.emitXonsh (cyclomatic 17) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:821 — Completions.emitXonsh has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Terminal.tryReadEvent (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

Terminal.tryReadEvent (cyclomatic 17) src/Fedit/Terminal.fs:305 — Terminal.tryReadEvent 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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ConfigIO.saveTo (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

ConfigIO.saveTo (cyclomatic 17) src/Fedit/Config.fs:541 — ConfigIO.saveTo has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Commands.completionsWith (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

Commands.completionsWith (cyclomatic 17) src/Fedit/Commands.fs:472 — Commands.completionsWith has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · HighlightRegistry.tryCreateWith (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

HighlightRegistry.tryCreateWith (cyclomatic 17) src/Fedit/Highlight.fs:125 — HighlightRegistry.tryCreateWith 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. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: Highlight.resolveCapture (cyclomatic 68) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.emitBash (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

Completions.emitBash (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:277 — Completions.emitBash has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Completions.emitElvish (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

Completions.emitElvish (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:718 — Completions.emitElvish has cyclomatic complexity 16 (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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Renderer.ansi16Of (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

Renderer.ansi16Of (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/Renderer.fs:26 — Renderer.ansi16Of has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Status.layout (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

Status.layout (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/Status.fs:267 — Status.layout has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Editor.refreshPrompt (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

Editor.refreshPrompt (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:657 — Editor.refreshPrompt has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: src/Fedit/Editor.fs holds 9 of the 43 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 491 of the 1036 points over it (47%), 2.8× the next-largest file (src/Fedit/Runtime.fs at 175). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Buffer.moveLines (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

Buffer.moveLines (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/Buffer.fs:531 — Buffer.moveLines has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromQueries (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromQueries (cyclomatic 16) src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs:222 — TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromQueries has cyclomatic complexity 16 (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. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: TerminalCapabilitiesModule.toLogString (cyclomatic 20) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×1

Deprecated: xunit — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.updateCore (cognitive 281) · ×1

Editor.updateCore (cognitive 281) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3717 — Editor.updateCore has cognitive complexity 281 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 57 (175 pts), if/else 42 (82 pts), boolean chains 17, error handling 1 (4 pts), loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 163). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Runtime.run (cognitive 268) · ×1

Runtime.run (cognitive 268) src/Fedit/Runtime.fs:418 — Runtime.run has cognitive complexity 268 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 46 (103 pts), match/switch 45 (90 pts), error handling 19 (38 pts), loops 12 (26 pts), boolean chains 11 (nesting depth added 135). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Layout.renderTextEditor (cognitive 114) · ×1

Layout.renderTextEditor (cognitive 114) src/Fedit/View.fs:357 — Layout.renderTextEditor has cognitive complexity 114 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (48 pts), match/switch 9 (36 pts), loops 7 (24 pts), boolean chains 6 (nesting depth added 76). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConfigIO.loadFrom (cognitive 80) · ×1

ConfigIO.loadFrom (cognitive 80) src/Fedit/Config.fs:78 — ConfigIO.loadFrom has cognitive complexity 80 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 19 (47 pts), if/else 11 (22 pts), loops 2 (8 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 45). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Layout.renderHexEditor (cognitive 75) · ×1

Layout.renderHexEditor (cognitive 75) src/Fedit/View.fs:209 — Layout.renderHexEditor has cognitive complexity 75 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 25 (51 pts), match/switch 4 (11 pts), boolean chains 9, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 35). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Program.main (cognitive 64) · ×1

Program.main (cognitive 64) src/Fedit/Program.fs:114 — Program.main has cognitive complexity 64 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (29 pts), match/switch 7 (24 pts), error handling 2 (7 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 37). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Layout.renderPicker (cognitive 63) · ×1

Layout.renderPicker (cognitive 63) src/Fedit/View.fs:659 — Layout.renderPicker has cognitive complexity 63 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (35 pts), match/switch 5 (19 pts), loops 2 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 39). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.runDefaultAction (cognitive 62) · ×1

Editor.runDefaultAction (cognitive 62) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2657 — Editor.runDefaultAction has cognitive complexity 62 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (30 pts), match/switch 12 (28 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 28). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.runPrompt (cognitive 61) · ×1

Editor.runPrompt (cognitive 61) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3438 — Editor.runPrompt has cognitive complexity 61 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 13 (47 pts), if/else 6 (13 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 41). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.executeCommand (cognitive 60) · ×1

Editor.executeCommand (cognitive 60) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2359 — Editor.executeCommand has cognitive complexity 60 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 15 (32 pts), if/else 17 (28 pts) (nesting depth added 28). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Layout.renderCompletionOverlay (cognitive 51) · ×1

Layout.renderCompletionOverlay (cognitive 51) src/Fedit/View.fs:761 — Layout.renderCompletionOverlay has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (44 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 25). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Layout.render (cognitive 50) · ×1

Layout.render (cognitive 50) src/Fedit/View.fs:884 — Layout.render has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (40 pts), match/switch 5 (7 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 24). 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.applyPluginActions (cognitive 46) · ×1

Editor.applyPluginActions (cognitive 46) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:1889 — Editor.applyPluginActions has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (23 pts), match/switch 7 (22 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 28). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Plugins.scanAndLoadWith (cognitive 44) · ×1

Plugins.scanAndLoadWith (cognitive 44) src/Fedit/Plugins.fs:645 — Plugins.scanAndLoadWith has cognitive complexity 44 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (20 pts), loops 8 (14 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 22). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Input.tryParseAnsiSequence (cognitive 42) · ×1

Input.tryParseAnsiSequence (cognitive 42) src/Fedit/Input.fs:171 — Input.tryParseAnsiSequence has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (26 pts), if/else 9 (11 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 21). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Buffer.moveLines (cognitive 42) · ×1

Buffer.moveLines (cognitive 42) src/Fedit/Buffer.fs:531 — Buffer.moveLines has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 20 (36 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Terminal.detectCapabilities (cognitive 40) · ×1

Terminal.detectCapabilities (cognitive 40) src/Fedit/Terminal.fs:126 — Terminal.detectCapabilities has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (17 pts), match/switch 2 (15 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 28). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Runtime.scanNode (cognitive 39) · ×1

Runtime.scanNode (cognitive 39) src/Fedit/Runtime.fs:305 — Runtime.scanNode has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (16 pts), if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · KeymapModule.parseAction (cognitive 37) · ×1

KeymapModule.parseAction (cognitive 37) src/Fedit/Keymap.fs:446 — KeymapModule.parseAction has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 11 (24 pts), if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Plugins.list (cognitive 35) · ×1

Plugins.list (cognitive 35) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:270 — Plugins.list has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), loops 3 (12 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 21). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Highlight.spansFor (cognitive 31) · ×1

Highlight.spansFor (cognitive 31) src/Fedit/Highlight.fs:608 — Highlight.spansFor has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (12 pts), loops 2 (11 pts), if/else 1 (5 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 22). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Parser.parse (cognitive 30) · ×1

Parser.parse (cognitive 30) src/Fedit/Cli.fs:159 — Parser.parse has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (22 pts), if/else 6 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Dock.panel (cognitive 30) · ×1

Dock.panel (cognitive 30) src/Fedit/Dock.fs:75 — Dock.panel has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 6 (16 pts), if/else 7 (11 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitPwsh (cognitive 29) · ×1

Completions.emitPwsh (cognitive 29) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:487 — Completions.emitPwsh has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 8 (18 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), if/else 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitBash (cognitive 28) · ×1

Completions.emitBash (cognitive 28) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:277 — Completions.emitBash has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), loops 6 (11 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.executePickerAction (cognitive 27) · ×1

Editor.executePickerAction (cognitive 27) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:2164 — Editor.executePickerAction has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 14 (27 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LspWire.classifyMessage (cognitive 27) · ×1

LspWire.classifyMessage (cognitive 27) src/Fedit/LspWire.fs:227 — LspWire.classifyMessage has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 8 (25 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitNushell (cognitive 26) · ×1

Completions.emitNushell (cognitive 26) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:647 — Completions.emitNushell has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 6 (16 pts), loops 6 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Terminal.readPasteTail (cognitive 26) · ×1

Terminal.readPasteTail (cognitive 26) src/Fedit/Terminal.fs:255 — Terminal.readPasteTail has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (19 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (2 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 12). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Input.tryMap (cognitive 26) · ×1

Input.tryMap (cognitive 26) src/Fedit/Input.fs:83 — Input.tryMap has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (18 pts), boolean chains 6, match/switch 2 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LspTransport.readContentLength (cognitive 26) · ×1

LspTransport.readContentLength (cognitive 26) src/Fedit/LspTransport.fs:64 — LspTransport.readContentLength has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (14 pts), match/switch 3 (10 pts), boolean chains 1, 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PieceTableModule.deleteRange (cognitive 26) · ×1

PieceTableModule.deleteRange (cognitive 26) src/Fedit/PieceTable.fs:161 — PieceTableModule.deleteRange has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (22 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Status.parseFormat (cognitive 24) · ×1

Status.parseFormat (cognitive 24) src/Fedit/Status.fs:35 — Status.parseFormat has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (23 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConfigIO.loadUserThemes (cognitive 24) · ×1

ConfigIO.loadUserThemes (cognitive 24) src/Fedit/Config.fs:418 — ConfigIO.loadUserThemes has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (16 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), if/else 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Commands.completionsWith (cognitive 24) · ×1

Commands.completionsWith (cognitive 24) src/Fedit/Commands.fs:472 — Commands.completionsWith has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (20 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitElvish (cognitive 23) · ×1

Completions.emitElvish (cognitive 23) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:718 — Completions.emitElvish has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (9 pts), loops 5 (8 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · KeymapModule.parseLine (cognitive 23) · ×1

KeymapModule.parseLine (cognitive 23) src/Fedit/Keymap.fs:583 — KeymapModule.parseLine has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), match/switch 2 (5 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitFishNode (cognitive 22) · ×1

Completions.emitFishNode (cognitive 22) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:427 — Completions.emitFishNode has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (12 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.run (cognitive 22) · ×1

Completions.run (cognitive 22) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:1190 — Completions.run has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (17 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.refreshPrompt (cognitive 22) · ×1

Editor.refreshPrompt (cognitive 22) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:657 — Editor.refreshPrompt has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (11 pts), if/else 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Renderer.appendDiffedCells (cognitive 21) · ×1

Renderer.appendDiffedCells (cognitive 21) src/Fedit/Renderer.fs:110 — Renderer.appendDiffedCells has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (13 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.setLanguageServerDisabled (cognitive 21) · ×1

Editor.setLanguageServerDisabled (cognitive 21) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:1227 — Editor.setLanguageServerDisabled has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (18 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HighlightRegistry.tryCreateWith (cognitive 21) · ×1

HighlightRegistry.tryCreateWith (cognitive 21) src/Fedit/Highlight.fs:125 — HighlightRegistry.tryCreateWith has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (8 pts), match/switch 5 (6 pts), error handling 3 (4 pts), loops 3 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv (cognitive 21) · ×1

TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv (cognitive 21) src/Fedit/TerminalCapabilities.fs:116 — TerminalCapabilitiesModule.fromEnv has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (13 pts), boolean chains 7, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 1). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Status.resolveToken (cognitive 20) · ×1

Status.resolveToken (cognitive 20) src/Fedit/Status.fs:159 — Status.resolveToken has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (11 pts), match/switch 5 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Status.layout (cognitive 20) · ×1

Status.layout (cognitive 20) src/Fedit/Status.fs:267 — Status.layout has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (13 pts), match/switch 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitXonsh (cognitive 19) · ×1

Completions.emitXonsh (cognitive 19) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:821 — Completions.emitXonsh has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (10 pts), loops 6 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.hexInterceptAction (cognitive 19) · ×1

Editor.hexInterceptAction (cognitive 19) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:1673 — Editor.hexInterceptAction has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (14 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.advanceReplay (cognitive 19) · ×1

Editor.advanceReplay (cognitive 19) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3071 — Editor.advanceReplay has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), match/switch 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 10). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · prototype-v2.html.themeDemo.treeMarker (cognitive 19) · ×1

prototype-v2.html.themeDemo.treeMarker (cognitive 19) docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype-v2.html:1523 — prototype-v2.html.themeDemo.treeMarker has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), ternaries 2 (5 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · prototype.html.themeDemo.treeMarker (cognitive 19) · ×1

prototype.html.themeDemo.treeMarker (cognitive 19) docs/superpowers/plans/revised-theme-system/prototype.html:1343 — prototype.html.themeDemo.treeMarker has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), ternaries 2 (5 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Completions.emitZshNode (cognitive 18) · ×1

Completions.emitZshNode (cognitive 18) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:158 — Completions.emitZshNode has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (9 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MacroFile.parseLine (cognitive 18) · ×1

MacroFile.parseLine (cognitive 18) src/Fedit/MacroIO.fs:83 — MacroFile.parseLine has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (11 pts), if/else 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ManifestJson.parse (cognitive 18) · ×1

ManifestJson.parse (cognitive 18) src/Fedit/Plugins.fs:196 — ManifestJson.parse has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (13 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Terminal.tryReadEvent (cognitive 17) · ×1

Terminal.tryReadEvent (cognitive 17) src/Fedit/Terminal.fs:305 — Terminal.tryReadEvent has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Layout.renderSidebar (cognitive 17) · ×1

Layout.renderSidebar (cognitive 17) src/Fedit/View.fs:167 — Layout.renderSidebar has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), match/switch 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Highlight.selectionLadder (cognitive 17) · ×1

Highlight.selectionLadder (cognitive 17) src/Fedit/Highlight.fs:668 — Highlight.selectionLadder has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (6 pts), if/else 1 (4 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.setHexViewMode (cognitive 16) · ×1

Editor.setHexViewMode (cognitive 16) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:1776 — Editor.setHexViewMode has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.runPromptListSession (cognitive 16) · ×1

Editor.runPromptListSession (cognitive 16) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:3376 — Editor.runPromptListSession has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (8 pts), match/switch 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.highlightEffects (cognitive 16) · ×1

Editor.highlightEffects (cognitive 16) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:4707 — Editor.highlightEffects has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Editor.hookEffects (cognitive 16) · ×1

Editor.hookEffects (cognitive 16) src/Fedit/Editor.fs:4954 — Editor.hookEffects has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 2 (6 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 9). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LspTransport.readLine (cognitive 16) · ×1

LspTransport.readLine (cognitive 16) src/Fedit/LspTransport.fs:36 — LspTransport.readLine has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ChordModule.parse (cognitive 16) · ×1

ChordModule.parse (cognitive 16) src/Fedit/Keys.fs:159 — ChordModule.parse has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), match/switch 2 (5 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.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:7 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:7-120 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:11-1250 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:14-359 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:5-395 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs:8-173 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13–18 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (13–18 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:208 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:208-225 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs:14-26 — 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. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–17 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–17 lines × 3) src/Fedit/Themes.fs:312 — src/Fedit/Themes.fs:312-328 | src/Fedit/Themes.fs:360-374 | src/Fedit/Themes.fs:423-433 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Fedit/Themes.fs:312` 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. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15–16 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (15–16 lines × 4) src/Fedit/Themes.fs:174 — src/Fedit/Themes.fs:174-189 | src/Fedit/Themes.fs:307-321 | src/Fedit/Themes.fs:355-369 | src/Fedit/Themes.fs:418-432 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Fedit/Themes.fs:174` 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. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7–15 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7–15 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Buffer.fs:654 — src/Fedit/Buffer.fs:654-660 | src/Fedit/Hex.fs:208-222 — 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. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:104 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:104-115 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:343-354 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs:157-168 — 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 `src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:104` 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:1192 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:1192-1200 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:195-203 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:220-228 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:341-349 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Buffer.fs:644 — src/Fedit/Buffer.fs:644-653 | src/Fedit/Hex.fs:199-207 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

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

Duplicated block (8 lines × 8) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:107 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:107-114 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:1191-1198 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:346-353 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:194-201 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:219-226 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:271-278 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Plugins.fs:340-347 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs:160-167 — there are 8 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 8 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Config.fs:61 — src/Fedit/Config.fs:61-67 | src/Fedit/Config.fs:96-102 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:86 — src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:86-96 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Completions.fs:1161-1171 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Keybinds.fs:325-335 | src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/Themes.fs:139-149 — 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 4 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Fedit/Cli/Commands/CommandReference.fs:86` 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src/Fedit/Config.fs:117 — src/Fedit/Config.fs:117-122 | src/Fedit/Config.fs:148-153 — 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 `src/Fedit/Config.fs:117` 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.

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.

Minor — 8 finding(s)

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.

D27 · Navigability · Scattered collaborators · ×1

Scattered collaborators — 84 % of calls cross a namespace and only 27 % of collaborators are co-located — group each feature's code into a vertical slice so a call's collaborators sit together.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

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.

P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1

No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add `semgrep --config=auto` plus gitleaks for committed secrets (F# is not a CodeQL language and has no language-specific SAST engine) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 30496 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×1

No security response headers detected website/vercel.json:1 — No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. This is reported because `vercel.json` configures this repository's static hosting, including its response headers, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.)

Minor — 335 finding(s)

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated (npm) · ×333

Outdated (npm): @alpinejs/focus — @alpinejs/focus 3.15.12 → 3.17.4 available.
Outdated (npm): @astrojs/compiler-binding — @astrojs/compiler-binding 0.2.1 → 0.5.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @astrojs/compiler-binding-darwin-arm64 — @astrojs/compiler-binding-darwin-arm64 0.2.1 → 0.5.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @astrojs/compiler-rs — @astrojs/compiler-rs 0.2.1 → 0.5.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @astrojs/internal-helpers — @astrojs/internal-helpers 0.10.0 → 0.11.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @astrojs/markdown-remark — @astrojs/markdown-remark 7.2.0 → 7.3.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @astrojs/telemetry — @astrojs/telemetry 3.3.2 → 3.3.3 available.
Outdated (npm): @babel/helper-string-parser — @babel/helper-string-parser 7.27.1 → 8.0.6 available.
Outdated (npm): @babel/helper-validator-identifier — @babel/helper-validator-identifier 7.28.5 → 8.0.6 available.
Outdated (npm): @babel/parser — @babel/parser 7.29.3 → 7.29.9 available.
Outdated (npm): @babel/types — @babel/types 7.29.0 → 8.0.6 available.
Outdated (npm): @bytecodealliance/preview2-shim — @bytecodealliance/preview2-shim 0.17.6 → 0.27.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @capsizecss/unpack — @capsizecss/unpack 4.0.0 → 4.0.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @clack/core — @clack/core 1.3.1 → 1.5.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @clack/prompts — @clack/prompts 1.4.0 → 1.8.1 available.
Outdated (npm): @edge-runtime/format — @edge-runtime/format 2.2.1 → 4.0.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @edge-runtime/node-utils — @edge-runtime/node-utils 2.3.0 → 4.0.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @edge-runtime/ponyfill — @edge-runtime/ponyfill 2.4.2 → 4.0.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @edge-runtime/primitives — @edge-runtime/primitives 4.1.0 → 6.0.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @edge-runtime/vm — @edge-runtime/vm 3.2.0 → 5.0.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @emnapi/core — @emnapi/core 1.10.0 → 1.11.3 available.
Outdated (npm): @emnapi/runtime — @emnapi/runtime 1.10.0 → 1.11.3 available.
Outdated (npm): @emnapi/wasi-threads — @emnapi/wasi-threads 1.2.1 → 2.1.0 available.
Outdated (npm): @esbuild/aix-ppc64 — @esbuild/aix-ppc64 0.27.7 → 0.28.2 available.
Outdated (npm): @esbuild/android-arm — @esbuild/android-arm 0.27.7 → 0.28.2 available.
+ 308 more in this group — see findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×2

Outdated: coverlet.collector — coverlet.collector 10.0.1 → 10.1.0 available (referenced by Fedit.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk — Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk 18.10.0 → 18.10.1 available (referenced by Fedit.Tests).

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-53515a0bde764d589ecdd104f2167731/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-53515a0bde764d589ecdd104f2167731/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	28	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	dotnet	—	dotnet list Fedit.slnx package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json	0	artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a10140-dee2-7fbc-85c6-9d424b4c6ea3 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

HelgeSverre/fedit

Findings by grade

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture — module dependency matrix

At a glance — Code Health · 55% · Adequate · gated by D1, D2 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 95% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 73% · Strong ·

At a glance — Readiness · 77% · Strong ·

At a glance — Security · 82% · Adequate · gated by D36 ·

At a glance — Accessibility · 66% · Adequate ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts