pyo3 — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

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

The system holds a strong overall standing of 78%, indicating a healthy asset that is well-architected and mature. However, this robust foundation is partially undermined by gaps in operational visibility and security hygiene. While the codebase is clean and the domain modeling is sound, the lack of comprehensive observability and automated dependency management introduces unnecessary risk to delivery speed and security exposure. The business can rely on the stability of the core logic, but must address the operational blind spots to maintain confidence in production releases.

The value tied up in this medium-sized system is significant, with nearly 100,000 lines of production code and a rebuild cost of approximately €190,000. The high quality of the code and architecture suggests that this investment is well-maintained, with minimal boilerplate and strong structural integrity. This means that changes are less likely to ripple unexpectedly, and new teams can pick up the work with relative ease. The low rebuild effort indicates that the system is not a legacy burden, but a modern, manageable asset that supports agile development and rapid iteration.

The most critical risk lies in production readiness, specifically the lack of structured logging across all modules. Without this, diagnosing issues in production becomes slow and costly, potentially leading to extended outages and higher support costs. This gap directly impacts reliability and customer trust. Additionally, security exposure is elevated due to incomplete dependency monitoring. While Dependabot is active for some packages, it does not cover Python dependencies, leaving the system vulnerable to known vulnerabilities that could be automatically patched. This creates a security blind spot that could lead to compliance issues or data breaches.

To maximize leverage, the immediate focus should be on extending structured logging to all runnable modules. This single action will significantly improve diagnosability, reducing mean time to resolution for incidents and enhancing operational confidence. Once logging is comprehensive, the team should configure Dependabot to monitor all package ecosystems and verify release protection rules. These steps are low-effort but high-impact, addressing the most pressing risks to reliability and security while preserving the system’s strong architectural and code health foundations.

Code Health 89% ★ Exemplary Architecture 95% ★ Exemplary Maturity 89% ★ Exemplary Readiness 71% Strong Security 74% Adequate · gated by D29 Event Sourcing 100% ★ Exemplary Performance 100% ★ Exemplary

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

Readiness 71% · 46% weightSecurity 74% · 25% weightMaturity 89% · 14% weightCode Health 89% · 8% weightArchitecture 95% · 4% weightEvent Sourcing 100% · 2% weightPerformance 100% · 1% weight

Every measured lens already clears the Healthy floor — there is no single drag to lift.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

New since the last scan (53+)

53 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-12) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

D3 · FileTooLong: src/stubs.rs pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (16–21 lines × 2) noxfile.py
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) examples/decorator/noxfile.py
D4 · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 5) examples/decorator/noxfile.py
D5 · Off the main sequence: pyo3-macros-backend
D5 · Off the main sequence: pyo3-build-config
D5 · Off the main sequence: pyo3-ffi
D15 · Hotspot: noxfile.py noxfile.py
D17 · TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs
D17 · TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs
D17 · TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs
D17 · FixmeComment pyo3-ffi/build.rs
D17 · TodoComment src/internal_tricks.rs
D17 · TodoComment src/buffer.rs
D17 · FixmeComment tests/test_gc.rs
D17 · FixmeComment tests/test_gc.rs
D20 · Decision is a bare "drop support for Python 3.8." with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6128.packaging.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Enable `PyLong(Writer|Export)` api on abi3 from 3.15+ for fast u128/i128 conversions" is present newsfragments/6160.added.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale newsfragments/6188.changed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "removed deprecated `FromPyObject` blanket implementation" is present newsfragments/6188.removed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision statement with no rationale or impact newsfragments/6274.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; the title names a lint but the body is an empty decision with only the lint name newsfragments/6309.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line rationale is present newsfragments/6360.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem (why inspect trailing args instead of omitting them) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6363.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the method names are stated newsfragments/6382.added.md
D20 · Title is informative but the body states only the decision (escape stub docstrings) with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6394.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem (why the annotation is needed) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6396.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the bug title newsfragments/6404.fixed.md
D20 · Only a decision is stated; no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6406.packaging.md
D20 · No context/problem (which Python versions the bug affects) and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale newsfragments/6410.fixed.2.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line title stating the fix newsfragments/6410.fixed.3.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line title with the fix newsfragments/6410.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Implement `Copy` for `PyVisit" is stated newsfragments/6412.added.md
D20 · No context/problem (why annotate these types with SupportsGetItem/Series instead of abc.Sequence) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6413.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem (why these GC timing hooks are needed) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6419.added.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no framing newsfragments/6420.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is stated newsfragments/6421.removed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Fix linker errors on PyPy for outdated FFI definitions where PyPy moved from a function to a macro." is present newsfragments/6422.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem (why the aliasing bug matters) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6424.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem (why pyfunction was marked METH_STATIC) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6428.fixed.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Add pypy3.12 dll to list of ffi sources" is present newsfragments/6429.added.md
D20 · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the task is stated newsfragments/6450.fixed.md
D20 · Title is informative but the body states only that Access traits are made available for datetime and gives no context/problem or consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6452.changed.md
D20 · Only the decision (MSRV bump) and no context/problem or consequences are stated newsfragments/6459.packaging.md
D22 · Naming inconsistency for context attachment methods. 'context' implies a static string or simple value, while 'with_context' implies a lazy evaluation (closure). In many Rust error handling libraries (like this one appears to be, given the `Error`/`ErrorReport` types), these are often unified under a single name (e.g., `with_context` or `context`) with overloads or distinct parameter types, or clearly distinguished by prefix (e.g., `context_static` vs `context_lazy`). Here, the verb 'with' is inconsistently applied.
D29 · REDACTED
D29 · REDACTED
D30 · REDACTED
D30 · REDACTED
D35 · Boundary-crossing change coupling: lib.rs ↔ macros.rs pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs
D35 · Change coupling: anyhow.rs ↔ eyre.rs src/conversions/anyhow.rs

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

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €62,000–€310,000

Cost to rebuild	€62,000–€310,000 (0.6–1.9 person-years (1,027–3,257 h), ~1–3 engineers)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	1.2× (at 78% 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 ~1.3 person-years of build effort (about ~€190,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 71% — 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 1.2× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

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

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

+5.8 pts · Medium effort · Observability

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

+5.8 pts · Medium effort · Deployment & Rollback

Dependabot is configured but does not watch `pip` — add that `package-ecosystem` entry to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.

+5.3 pts · Medium effort · Security & performance tooling

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage

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

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

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

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

Architecture — module dependency matrix

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

295 modules, 504 dependencies. 2 dependency cycles across 63 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 255 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 pyo3.call.private	2 pyo3_introspection.model	3 pyo3.sync.once_lock	4 pyo3_macros_backend.pyfunction.signature	5 pyo3.impl_.pymodule	6 pyo3_macros_backend.utils	7 pyo3.impl_.pyfunction	8 pyo3_macros_backend.py_expr	9 pyo3.marker	10 pyo3.err.err_state	11 pyo3.impl_.pymethods	12 pyo3.pycell	13 pyo3.sync	14 pyo3.type_object	15 pyo3_build_config.errors	16 pyo3_ffi.object	17 pyo3.err.cast_error	18 pyo3_macros_backend.method	19 pyo3.pyclass.guard	20 pyo3_macros_backend.pymethod	21 pyo3.err	22 pyo3_macros_backend.pyimpl	23 pyo3.impl_.extract_argument	24 pyo3.impl_.pyclass.lazy_type_object	26 pyo3.impl_.pyclass	27 pyo3.pyclass	28 pyo3.types.any	29 pyo3.types.list	30 pyo3.types.slice	31 pyo3.types.string	32 pyo3.types.tuple	33 pyo3.types.weakref.anyref	34 pyo3.instance	35 pyo3.conversion	38 pyo3.pyclass_init	40 pyo3.internal.pyclass_init
1 pyo3.call.private
2 pyo3_introspection.model
3 pyo3.sync.once_lock									2
4 pyo3_macros_backend.pyfunction.signature		2						1										1
5 pyo3.impl_.pymodule	4		1						1																								4
6 pyo3_macros_backend.utils		1		1
7 pyo3.impl_.pyfunction	2				1				2																								2
8 pyo3_macros_backend.py_expr		1				3
9 pyo3.marker	1						2																										2
10 pyo3.err.err_state									5																								4
11 pyo3.impl_.pymethods	1								5																								1
12 pyo3.pycell									4																								4	4
13 pyo3.sync	4		1						7																								2
14 pyo3.type_object									2																								2
15 pyo3_build_config.errors									1												2												1
16 pyo3_ffi.object									1
17 pyo3.err.cast_error									1						2						1												6
18 pyo3_macros_backend.method		4		3		5		3							1
19 pyo3.pyclass.guard									4								2																6	4
20 pyo3_macros_backend.pymethod		1		2		9												13
21 pyo3.err									4	2		2			1		2		2														3	1
22 pyo3_macros_backend.pyimpl		2				2												1		1
23 pyo3.impl_.extract_argument	8								5									5	2		2												6
24 pyo3.impl_.pyclass.lazy_type_object									3				1								1				1								2
25 pyo3_macros_backend.pyclass		6				5												1		5		2
26 pyo3.impl_.pyclass	22								20		1													1		1							1	1
27 pyo3.pyclass														1											1
28 pyo3.types.any	1								1																1	1							1
29 pyo3.types.list	1								1																1		1						3
30 pyo3.types.slice	1								2																		1						1	1
31 pyo3.types.string	1	1							2																		1						1
32 pyo3.types.tuple	1								2												1						1						7
33 pyo3.types.weakref.anyref	1								1					1													1						2
34 pyo3.instance	7						4		5			4											1			1	1	3	1	1	4	1		5
35 pyo3.conversion	3								2																								1
36 pyo3.coroutine									1																								2
37 pyo3.pyclass.create_type_object									2		4					1									2								1
38 pyo3.pyclass_init	1								2																								1			3
39 pyo3.buffer									2																								3	1
40 pyo3.internal.pyclass_init	1								2																								1		3

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

At a glance — Code Health · 89% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 7.7 D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 7.1 D3 · Rust God Classes 8.6 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.7 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 9.7

At a glance — Architecture · 95% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 8.0 D7 · Rust Architectural Integrity 10.0 D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 9.0 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 9.6 AX10 · Repo Code composition 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

The Bad

D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 6.0

At a glance — Maturity · 89% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.8 D16 · Rust Bus Factor 9.9 D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 8.0 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 8.2 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 8.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Ugly

D20 · Rust ADR Quality 2.6 D25 · Rust ADR Conformance 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 71% · Strong ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D13 · Rust Secret Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 8.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Bad

P2 · Repo Observability 4.8 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0

At a glance — Security · 74% · Adequate · gated by D29 ·

The Good

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 10.0 D30 · Rust Dependency Vulnerabilities 9.2 D43 · Rust Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · Rust Platform End-of-Life 10.0

The Bad

D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 5.0

The Ugly

D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 0.1

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

The Good

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

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A03:2021 — Injection	165	High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components	2	High / Critical

Roadmap

First, extend structured logging to all remaining modules to ensure full production diagnosability, and verify that deployment protection rules are visible and effective to prevent bad builds from reaching users. Next, update Dependabot to monitor pip dependencies for automatic security updates, and resolve the identified static analysis findings regarding mutable action tags and secret inheritance. These steps collectively strengthen observability, deployment safety, and security hygiene across the codebase.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.	+5.8 pts	Medium	Observability
The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.	+5.8 pts	Medium	Deployment & Rollback
Dependabot is configured but does not watch `pip` — add that `package-ecosystem` entry to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.	+5.3 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Resolve the 15 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 140 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once.	+2.5 pts	Medium	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2).	+0.8 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED.	+0.8 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 1 High vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED.	+0.8 pts	Low	Dependency Vulnerabilities
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.	+0.7 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 165 files carrying findings, judged against the Preview bar: 1% slop · 22% mixed · 77% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs	1.6	Slop	Change Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: lib.rs ↔ macros.rs
pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs	3.2	Mixed	Change Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: stubs.rs ↔ introspection.rs
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.5	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.5	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs	5.0	Mixed	Change Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: method.rs ↔ coroutine.rs
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs	5.9	Mixed	God Classes: TooManyFields: PyTypeObject
pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
src/inspect.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: FixmeComment

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 — 170

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 — 324

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 — 7

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

Could not be resolved — 50

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. 35 of 42 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 7 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 42 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D7D9D13D15D16D17D19D20D21D22D25D26D28D29D30D34D35D36D43D44AX10AX3AX4AX8AX9ES1ES2M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P6PF3

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, 485 of 501 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0ea33-ea5f-7a7f-886a-8705e4a4d442.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT READ here — but this repository measures it: a Codecov configuration (codecov.yml) shows that coverage is collected and tracked in your own CI. The built-in collector has no runner for this ecosystem (.rs, .py), so the analyzer could not read the number — a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not an unmeasured repo. Not scored. To have the real number read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`, or `coverage run -m pytest` then `coverage xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`, or `coverage run -m pytest` then `coverage xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.rs, .py) and this repository declares a Cargo test suite (repository root, 155 test files), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 40 direct Cargo declaration(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs crates.io, and no committed Cargo.lock resolves them to versions, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository declares Cargo manifests but commits no Cargo.lock, so the set of crates it actually ships is not resolvable from the checkout: its declarations carry version RANGES, and grading whichever release happens to be newest today would be a verdict about a dependency graph this repository has not pinned. Commit the lock and this dimension grades the closure against crates.io. NOT a finding that this repository's licences are compliant: this dimension asserts nothing about its licensing in either direction.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX2 Stateful singletons — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. The Runtime Evidence tier boots an app only via docker-compose, an Aspire AppHost, or a Dockerfile. None was found, so no live runtime a11y/egress/header evidence was collected. You can widen what we reach: add a docker-compose.yml (or an Aspire AppHost) that brings the app up with its dependencies. Watchdog then boots it in an isolated sandbox and gathers real runtime evidence — you change nothing in your pipeline (no CI step, no SDK).
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P10 Library API & versioning — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads NuGet packaging and C# public API only, and no .NET project was loaded for this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
PF1 Benchmark discipline — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X10 Duplicated predicate — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D7 Architectural Integrity: Layering is checked against detected/declared rules — an architecture whose boundaries live in convention or in code review, not in a rule a scanner can read, is not enforced here.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
D25 ADR Conformance: ADR conformance is the LLM-scored fraction of sampled code that follows recorded decisions — it checks the decisions that were written down and the slices it sampled, not unrecorded rules or the whole tree.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (7): D19, D20, D21, D22, D25, D26, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity7.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

17 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl at 37. A further 5 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 PyMethodKind::from_name at 88 — 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 functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs (PyMethodKind::from_name at 88), pyo3-macros-backend/src/py_expr.rs (PyExpr::to_introspection_token_stream at 20), src/buffer.rs (pyo3::buffer::native_element_type_from_type_char at 18). 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.

pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl (cyclomatic 37) · ×4pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100

pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields (cyclomatic 27) · ×2pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:190

FnSpec::parse_fn_type (cyclomatic 21) · ×2pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:684

Imports::serialize_expr (cyclomatic 28)pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:478

PyClassPyO3Option::parse (cyclomatic 26)pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:130

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

What to do

Resolve the 4 pyo3_macros_backend finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with pyimpl.rs (2), module.rs, introspection.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 pyo3_ffi_check_macro finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with lib.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 FnSpec finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with method.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity7.1 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

36 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content at 35.

pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl (cognitive 34) · ×7pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100

Imports::serialize_expr (cognitive 34) · ×2pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:478

pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields (cognitive 31) · ×2pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:190

FnSpec::get_wrapper_function (cognitive 28) · ×2pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:818

pyo3_build_config::impl_::search_lib_dir (cognitive 23) · ×2pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:2165

+ 19 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 7 pyo3_macros_backend finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with module.rs, introspection.rs, utils.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Imports finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with stubs.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 pyo3_ffi_check_macro finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with lib.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes8.6 / 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 8.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

40 god class(es) detected.

FileTooLong: src/pyclass.rs · ×20pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs

FunctionTooLong: pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl · ×8pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100

TooManyFields: PyConfig · ×5pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/initconfig.rs:84

MethodTooLong: PyClassImplsBuilder.impl_pyclassimpl · ×3pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2789

TooManyMethods: Py · ×3src/instance.rs:1494

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

What to do

Resolve the 20 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with pyclass.rs (2), datetime.rs (2), impl_.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (20 warning-level).
Resolve the 8 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with pyclass.rs (2), pymethod.rs (2), module.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 TooManyFields finding(s) in God Classes — start with object.rs (2), get_slot.rs (2), initconfig.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 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 55 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

51 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 4 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 2 of the 55 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×5pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:134

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×4pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:165

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×4pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:786

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×4pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:77

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×3pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs:53

+ 25 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 5 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with lib.rs, stubs.rs, frompyobject.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with frompyobject.rs (2), pyclass.rs, any.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with pymethod.rs, any.rs, sequence.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

12 production modules (Cargo+Python), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 3 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 6 of the 12 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, or are not Gradle/Maven modules or Cargo crates).

Off the main sequence: pyo3-macros-backend · ×3

What to do

Resolve the 3 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D7 · Architectural Integrity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

All 29 mechanizable ADR(s) are enforced: 22 by analyzers, 7 by tests. Dependency cycles not checked (no project-reference graph; where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d7_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

1543 test methods: 1160 unit, 383 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 1389 `#[test]` function(s) across 155 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 43 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test. The Python suite contributes 154 test function(s) across 30 file(s) declaring at least one — every `def test…` in a file pytest or unittest would collect, which is those frameworks' own definition of a case; a parametrize table counts once, so this is a floor. Its tier split is read from file names and paths only.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Top hotspots: noxfile.py (21×16=336); pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs (8×28=224); pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs (8×27=216)

Hotspot: noxfile.py · ×10noxfile.py:1614

What to do

Resolve the 10 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with noxfile.py, stubs.rs, lib.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D16 · Bus Factor9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").

Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.

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

3 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is guide/glossary_linker.py. Counted over 208 of the 319 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1

Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt9.7 / 10Stronggated by 94 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

123 deducted task-comment markers across 93321 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.7. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×68pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:4003

FixmeComment · ×24pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:2337

HackCommentpyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:504

TodoComment repeated across 30 filessrc/pyclass_init.rs:1

What to do

Resolve the 68 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with create_type_object.rs (6), pyclass.rs (5), lib.rs (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (68 warning-level).
Resolve the 24 FixmeComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with pymethods.rs (4), impl_.rs (3), lib.rs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (24 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 HackComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with pyimpl.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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 is excellent: it states what PyO3 does (bindings for Python, tools for creating native modules), links to the stable/main API docs, and gives a clear Usage section covering Rust versions, distribution options, and maturin steps. It also documents the examples directory with its own READMEs that are focused on their respective crates rather than the repository as a whole. The Architecture.md file is a well-written high-level overview of PyO3's six main parts (low-level C API bindings, object-bindings, procedural macros, build.rs, and pyo3-build-config), though it is clipped mid-sentence and does not yet show its full outline.

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — The repository's root README is excellent: it states what PyO3 does (bindings for Python, tools for creating native modules), links to the stable/main API docs, and gives a clear Usage section covering Rust versions, distribution options, and maturin steps. It also documents the examples directory with its own READMEs that are focused on their respective crates rather than the repository as a whole. The Architecture.md file is a well-written high-level overview of PyO3's six main parts (low-level C API bindings, object-bindings, procedural macros, build.rs, and pyo3-build-config), though it is clipped mid-sentence and does not yet show its full outline.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D20 · ADR QualityWeak◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

Evaluated 62 ADR(s) individually; mean quality 2.6/10 (frequently incomplete). 53 flagged with a specific gap.

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale · ×3newsfragments/6056.added.md

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is stated · ×3newsfragments/6324.changed.md

Decision is a bare "drop support for Python 3.8." with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offsnewsfragments/6128.packaging.md

No context/problem (why convert to num-bigint now) and no consequences/trade-offsnewsfragments/6144.changed.md

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Add init config to `ffi` crate" is presentnewsfragments/6152.added.md

+ 44 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 3 No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line… finding(s) in ADR Quality — start with 6056.added.md, 6188.changed.md, 6195.fixed.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is… finding(s) in ADR Quality — start with 6324.changed.md, 6365.fixed.md, 6421.removed.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Decision is a bare "drop support for Python 3.8." with no… finding(s) in ADR Quality — start with 6128.packaging.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-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?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyStronggated by 1 serious finding◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

1 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 416 exposed types.

Naming inconsistency for context attachment methods. 'context' implies a static string or simple value, while 'with_context' implies a lazy evaluation (closure). In many Rust error handling libraries (like this one appears to be, given the `Error`/`ErrorReport` types), these are often unified under a single name (e.g., `with_context` or `context`) with overloads or distinct parameter types, or clearly distinguished by prefix (e.g., `context_static` vs `context_lazy`). Here, the verb 'with' is inconsistently applied.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Naming inconsistency for context attachment methods. 'context' implies a… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D25 · ADR ConformanceCritical◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the code actually follows the decisions recorded in the project's ADRs.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature against ADRs plus a deterministic structural code summary; findings linked to repo-rooted ADR paths for traceability. Advisory.

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

0 conform / 2 violate across 62 ADRs.

ADR not followed: 6195.fixed · ×2newsfragments/6195.fixed.md

What to do

Resolve the 2 ADR not followed finding(s) in ADR Conformance — start with 6195.fixed.md, 6251.changed.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Enforce ADR Conformance in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d25_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

2 of 10 build units (Cargo) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

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)0.1 / 10Critical✓ 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 0.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

165 finding(s): 0 critical, 164 high, 1 medium, 0 low. 140 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 3 file(s) — `pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs` (line 500), `pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs` (line 113, line 135), `src/pyclass/create_type_object.rs` (line 472, line 478) — 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 1 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

+ 4 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 15 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 140 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (155 issue-level, 15 of them charged here).
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities9.2 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 1 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 1 High vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

1 of 208 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is src/types/genericalias.rs. Counted over 208 of the 319 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling9.6 / 10Adequategated by 3 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Strongest change-coupling: anyhow.rs↔eyre.rs 90%; ellipsis.rs↔notimplemented.rs 85%; method.rs↔coroutine.rs 82%

Boundary-crossing change coupling: method.rs ↔ coroutine.rs · ×3pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs

Change coupling: anyhow.rs ↔ eyre.rs · ×8src/conversions/anyhow.rs

Change coupling clique: ellipsis.rs, none.rs, notimplemented.rssrc/types/ellipsis.rs

What to do

Resolve the 3 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with method.rs, stubs.rs, lib.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
Resolve the 8 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with anyhow.rs, array.rs, frozenset.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Change coupling clique finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with ellipsis.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing5.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

+ 2 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?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition10.0 / 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?

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

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)8.2 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 18 of 31 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation8.0 / 10Strong✓ 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.

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?

P2 · Observability4.8 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Only 1/4 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`, `pyo3-ffi-check`, `pyo3-introspection`.

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Dependabot is configured but does not watch `pip` — add that `package-ecosystem` entry to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	89%	Exemplary	Solid.
Architecture	95%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	89%	Exemplary	Solid.
Readiness	71%	Strong	Largest drag on the score — prioritise here.
Security	74%	Adequate — gated by D29	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event Sourcing	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Solid.

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

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

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

Not included — 76 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

AC1 Text alternatives — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC2 Forms & labels — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC3 Page structure — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC5 ARIA correctness — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC7 A11y enforcement — Frontend below the scale floor (6 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX2 Stateful singletons — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~20788 lines of test source are present (.rs, .py) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .rs suite was found but not re-run
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 40 direct Cargo declaration(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs crates.io, and no committed Cargo.lock resolves them to versions, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — Crate licences not graded — this Cargo repository commits no Cargo.lock
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. 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.
D27 Navigability — symbol resolution incomplete — too few calls resolved to assess navigability
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — D6 reads a CS/VB/GO/SCALA/SWIFT/DART/JAVA/PY/KT/TS/TSX/MTS/CTS/JS/JSX/MJS/CJS/PHP class graph only — this repository's production source is .h, .rs, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 149 value object(s); 1 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P10 Library API & versioning — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Rust source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
PF2 Allocation hygiene — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X10 Duplicated predicate — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X7 Silent fallback defaults — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 170 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
+ 130 more in this group — see findings.md.

D35 · Change Coupling · Boundary-crossing change coupling · ×3

Boundary-crossing change coupling: method.rs ↔ coroutine.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs — `pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs` (context pyo3-macros-backend) and `src/impl_/coroutine.rs` (context impl_) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 82% of the time (9 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `016f795f` Simplify method receivers in macros (#5684); `a7081e72` fix `async` functions return `()`, not `None` (#5685); `2e56f659` split `PyCell` and `PyClassObject` concepts (#3917) — run `git show` on any of them.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: stubs.rs ↔ introspection.rs pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs — `pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs` (context pyo3-introspection) and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs` (context pyo3-macros-backend) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 56% of the time (14 of the 25 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 14 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `e8701ab6` Introspection: generate nested classes for complex enums (#5708); `185e6b34` Stub generation & introspection: emit async keyword for async functio…; `2584edbe` Introspection: pyclass(extends) support (#5331) — run `git show` on any of them.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: lib.rs ↔ macros.rs pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs — `pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs` (context pyo3-ffi-check) and `pyo3-ffi/src/impl_/macros.rs` (context pyo3-ffi) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 50% of the time (6 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `3260c483` bump GraalPy versions tested in CI, test graalpy on windows (#6406); `276ffd25` fix raw-dylib opt-out on windows x86 (#6410); `d566a2db` more cleanup of private FFI definitions (#6042) — run `git show` on any of them.

D25 · ADR Conformance · ADR not followed · ×2

ADR not followed: 6195.fixed newsfragments/6195.fixed.md — The decision requires a public type that is not present in the summary, so it contradicts the binding-to-private-CPython-on-old-versions contract. (newsfragments/6195.fixed.md)
ADR not followed: 6251.changed newsfragments/6251.changed.md — The public type PyBytes::new_with_writer signature is unchanged from the ADR, so it does not contradict the decision. (newsfragments/6251.changed.md)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High vulnerability · ×1

REDACTED

Serious — 324 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×68

TodoComment pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:4003 — // TODO: probably should deprecate using this variable at all, seemingly only used in `add_python_framework_link_args` — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:571 — // TODO: probably need to clean these up — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:601 — // TODO: PyPy 3.12 declares these symbols in its headers but does not implement them? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:608 — // TODO: deprecated backwards compatibility aliases to be removed in PyO3 0.31 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs:175 — // TODO: can probably sniff arg types by binding sniffers for each argument position and then passing — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs:193 — // TODO: can probably sniff arg types by binding sniffers for each argument position and then passing — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/weakrefobject.rs:11 — // TODO: PyO3 is depending on this symbol in `reference.rs`, we should change this and — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/refcount.rs:161 — // TODO: Py_SET_REFCNT — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/refcount.rs:193 — // TODO: reimplement the logic in the header in the free-threaded build, for a little bit of performance. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/refcount.rs:272 — // TODO: reimplement the logic in the header in the free-threaded build, for a little bit of performance. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/lib.rs:417 — // TODO: deprecate this now MSRV is above 1.77 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/floatobject.rs:5 — // TODO: remove (see https://github.com/PyO3/pyo3/pull/1341#issuecomment-751515985)
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/dictobject.rs:150 — // TODO: remove (see https://github.com/PyO3/pyo3/pull/1341#issuecomment-751515985)
TodoComment pyo3-ffi/src/impl_/macros.rs:31 — // TODO: reduce the number of `_Py*` exports from pyo3-ffi over time — the fewer — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:419 — // TODO: we use currently a format like Foo2. It might be nicer to use something like ModFoo — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:1753 — // TODO: addressing #6024 could allow to simplify this by using type
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:435 — // TODO: this might create a naming conflict — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:485 — // TODO: not sure this can happen — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:505 — // TODO: use typing.Self? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction.rs:111 — // TODO: unused for now, intended for pyo3(deprecated) special-case — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:749 — // TODO(mkovaxx): Unit(PyClassEnumUnitVariant<'a>), — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:925 — // todo(remove this dead code allowance once __repr__ is implemented — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1145 — // TODO(icxolu): switch this to lookup the variants on the type object, once that is immutable — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1310 — // TODO(mkovaxx): propagate variant.options — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1663 — // TODO: figure out correct type — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
+ 43 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · FixmeComment · ×24

FixmeComment pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:2337 — // FIXME: PyPy & GraalPy do not support the Stable ABI. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:350 — // FIXME: for many of these `not(PyPy)` cases, — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:578 — // FIXME: probably outdated definitions that fail to build, need investigation, — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment pyo3-ffi/build.rs:285 — // FIXME: this should probably be done with better configuration in pyo3-build-config — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/compile.rs:47 — // FIXME: these constants should probably be &CStr, if they are used at all — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/macros.rs:106 — /// FIXME: this currently unconditionally allocates a `CString`. We should consider making this not so: — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/lib.rs:28 — // FIXME https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121621#issuecomment-1965156376
FixmeComment src/err/mod.rs:66 — // FIXME: `arguments` should become fallible — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/err/impls.rs:78 — //FIXME(icxolu) remove unwrap — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/err/impls.rs:111 — // FIXME(icxolu) remove unwrap — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/err/impls.rs:145 — // FIXME(icxolu) remove unwrap — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/impl_/pymethods.rs:464 — // FIXME: return an error if current type not in the MRO? Should be impossible. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/impl_/pymethods.rs:573 — // FIXME: return an error if current type not in the MRO? Should be impossible. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/impl_/pymethods.rs:499 — // FIXME same question as cython: what if the current type is not in the MRO? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/impl_/pymethods.rs:594 — // FIXME same question as cython: what if the current type is not in the MRO? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/pycell/impl_.rs:286 — // FIXME: there is potentially subtle issues here if the base is overwritten — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/pycell/impl_.rs:325 — // FIXME: should this be using actual_type.tp_dealloc? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/types/function.rs:61 — // FIXME: stop leaking the def — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment src/types/function.rs:79 — // FIXME: stop leaking the def — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment tests/test_proto_methods.rs:103 — // FIXME __getattr__ cannot be accessed via the type's __getattr__ slot0 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment tests/test_proto_methods.rs:650 — // FIXME __getattr__ cannot be accessed via the type's __getattr__ slot — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment tests/test_inheritance.rs:523 — // FIXME: it should be possible to use variable layout to inherit dict on graalpy — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment tests/test_gc.rs:673 — // FIXME: should this really need to be the case? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment tests/test_gc.rs:1118 — // FIXME https://github.com/PyO3/pyo3/issues/5211

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×20

FileTooLong: src/pyclass.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs — FileTooLong — 2336 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 39 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1836 over it, 4.67× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/impl_.rs pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs — FileTooLong — 1542 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 41 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1042 over it, 3.08× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/pymethod.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs — FileTooLong — 1442 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 942 over it, 2.88× 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: ./noxfile.py noxfile.py — FileTooLong — 1264 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 764 over it, 2.53× 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: impl_/pyclass.rs src/impl_/pyclass.rs — FileTooLong — 909 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 409 over it, 1.82× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/method.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs — FileTooLong — 852 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 352 over it, 1.70× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/instance.rs src/instance.rs — FileTooLong — 746 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 246 over it, 1.49× 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: impl_/extract_argument.rs src/impl_/extract_argument.rs — FileTooLong — 672 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 172 over it, 1.34× 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: types/tuple.rs src/types/tuple.rs — FileTooLong — 650 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 150 over it, 1.30× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/introspection.rs pyo3-introspection/src/introspection.rs — FileTooLong — 631 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 131 over it, 1.26× 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: types/datetime.rs src/types/datetime.rs — FileTooLong — 614 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 114 over it, 1.23× 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: types/any.rs src/types/any.rs — FileTooLong — 608 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 64% of them inside a single declaration: Bound (2 blocks, 848-1456). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 108 over it, 1.22× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: src/object.rs pyo3-ffi/src/object.rs — FileTooLong — 590 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 90 over it, 1.18× 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: std/num.rs src/conversions/std/num.rs — FileTooLong — 567 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 67 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/exceptions.rs src/exceptions.rs — FileTooLong — 564 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 64 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/module.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs — FileTooLong — 553 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 53 over it, 1.11× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/datetime.rs pyo3-ffi/src/datetime.rs — FileTooLong — 543 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 42 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 43 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: cpython/unicodeobject.rs pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/unicodeobject.rs — FileTooLong — 538 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 38 over it, 1.08× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: types/dict.rs src/types/dict.rs — FileTooLong — 506 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 6 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.
FileTooLong: src/stubs.rs pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs — FileTooLong — 502 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 2 over it, 1.00× 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.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×10

Hotspot: noxfile.py noxfile.py:1614 — noxfile.py changed 21 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in noxfile.check_feature_powerset at line 1614. 4 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 17 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- noxfile.py`: 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: pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:478 — pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs changed 8 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 28 in Imports::serialize_expr at line 478. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 6 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:190 — pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs changed 8 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 27 in pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields at line 190. 4 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 4 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2789 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs changed 11 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in PyClassImplsBuilder::impl_pyclassimpl at line 2789. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 9 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:396 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 21 in pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::method_introspection_code at line 396. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 5 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 37 in pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl at line 100. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 2 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:818 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in FnSpec::get_wrapper_function at line 818. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 3 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:392 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 18 in IntrospectionNode::add_to_serialization at line 392. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 2 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pyo3-macros-backend/src/py_expr.rs pyo3-macros-backend/src/py_expr.rs:218 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/py_expr.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 20 in PyExpr::to_introspection_token_stream at line 218. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 2 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pyo3-macros-backend/src/py_expr.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/inspect.rs src/inspect.rs:256 — src/inspect.rs changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in PyStaticExpr::fmt at line 256. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 1 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 21:09:00 +00:00' --until='2026-09-28 21:09:00 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/inspect.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×8

FunctionTooLong: pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl runs 278 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 178 over it, 2.78× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: pyo3_macros_backend::pyclass::impl_simple_enum pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1015 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::pyclass::impl_simple_enum runs 132 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 32 over it, 1.32× 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: pyo3_ffi_check::main pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs:14 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_ffi_check::main runs 127 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 27 over it, 1.27× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: pyo3_macros_backend::pyclass::impl_complex_enum pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1198 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::pyclass::impl_complex_enum runs 127 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 27 over it, 1.27× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: pyo3_macros_backend::pymethod::impl_py_setter_def pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:675 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::pymethod::impl_py_setter_def runs 116 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 16 over it, 1.16× 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: pyo3_macros_backend::pyfunction::impl_wrap_pyfunction pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction.rs:340 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::pyfunction::impl_wrap_pyfunction runs 111 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 11 over it, 1.11× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: pyo3_macros_backend::pymethod::generate_method_body pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:1565 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::pymethod::generate_method_body runs 109 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 9 over it, 1.09× 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: pyo3_macros_backend::params::impl_arg_params pyo3-macros-backend/src/params.rs:56 — FunctionTooLong — pyo3_macros_backend::params::impl_arg_params runs 104 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 4 over it, 1.04× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×8

Change coupling: anyhow.rs ↔ eyre.rs src/conversions/anyhow.rs — `src/conversions/anyhow.rs` and `src/conversions/eyre.rs` change together 90% of the time (9 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `6a930e9d` internal: No std broken on main (#6383); `18bca6ec` reintroduce `PyErr` constructors and methods (#4475); `6caefd15` Add back `PyBytes::new` (#4387) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: array.rs ↔ vec.rs src/conversions/std/array.rs — `src/conversions/std/array.rs` and `src/conversions/std/vec.rs` change together 82% of the time (9 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `74d16b00` Introspection: use `SupportsGetItem`/`SupportsLenAndGetItem` instead …; `ec7a0dc9` extract_sequence: avoid a not useful cast (#5800); `5e6df2d3` Cow<[u8]> FromPyObject impl: allow any Sequence[int] (#5667) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: frozenset.rs ↔ set.rs src/types/frozenset.rs — `src/types/frozenset.rs` and `src/types/set.rs` change together 79% of the time (23 of the 29 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 23 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `efa8b5dd` Use PySet_GET_SIZE for sets and frozensets (#6226); `c9dbdcba` Conversions: make use of public APIs to construct set and list (#5801); `0f4c7ca2` remove redundant counters for remaining elements in set and frozenset… — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: introspection.rs ↔ stubs.rs pyo3-introspection/src/introspection.rs — `pyo3-introspection/src/introspection.rs` and `pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs` change together 68% of the time (15 of the 22 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 15 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `e8701ab6` Introspection: generate nested classes for complex enums (#5708); `cb0c4616` Introspection: use pyclass introspection ids in the type hint express…; `185e6b34` Stub generation & introspection: emit async keyword for async functio… — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: mapping.rs ↔ sequence.rs src/types/mapping.rs — `src/types/mapping.rs` and `src/types/sequence.rs` change together 68% of the time (25 of the 37 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 25 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `19eff32f` Introspection: add TYPE_HINT to PyTypeInfo manual implementations (#5…; `c5c941e1` PyIterator, PyMapping, PySequence: implement PyTypeInfo (#5402); `011916f4` Introspection: Adds basic input type annotations (#5089) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: object.rs ↔ pyerrors.rs pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs — `pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs` and `pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/pyerrors.rs` change together 60% of the time (6 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `5635b0f1` Bump supported cpython version to 3.14 for testing (#4811); `9e63b34c` Fix struct layouts on GraalPy (#4802); `621898b0` ci: add Python 3.12-dev jobs — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: exceptions.rs ↔ traceback.rs src/exceptions.rs — `src/exceptions.rs` and `src/types/traceback.rs` change together 54% of the time (7 of the 13 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `18bca6ec` reintroduce `PyErr` constructors and methods (#4475); `a9390068` Deprecate Py::into_ref (#3867); `940804fe` Pyerr value bound (#3820) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: num_bigint.rs ↔ num_complex.rs src/conversions/num_bigint.rs — `src/conversions/num_bigint.rs` and `src/conversions/num_complex.rs` change together 53% of the time (9 of the 17 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `62094e39` internal: add safety comments in conversions (num-rational, num-compl…; `c77b8536` use unique module names in unit and integration tests (#4501); `5ca81023` ci: rework GitHub caching strategy (#3886) — run `git show` on any of them.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · pyo3_macros_backend · ×7

pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl (cognitive 34) pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100 — pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (26 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (2 pts), match/switch 2 (nesting depth added 13). Of this number, 31 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to one function item inside it that branches. 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.
pyo3_macros_backend::introspection::arguments_introspection_data (cognitive 26) pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:229 — pyo3_macros_backend::introspection::arguments_introspection_data has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (24 pts), loops 2 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
pyo3_macros_backend::utils::get_doc (cognitive 25) pyo3-macros-backend/src/utils.rs:87 — pyo3_macros_backend::utils::get_doc has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (24 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). 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.
pyo3_macros_backend::intopyobject::build_derive_into_pyobject (cognitive 22) pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:488 — pyo3_macros_backend::intopyobject::build_derive_into_pyobject has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (17 pts), match/switch 3 (4 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
pyo3_macros_backend::pyclass::build_py_class (cognitive 21) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:265 — pyo3_macros_backend::pyclass::build_py_class has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), match/switch 3 (4 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.
pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::add_shared_proto_slots (cognitive 19) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:315 — pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::add_shared_proto_slots has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19. 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.
pyo3_macros_backend::pymethod::impl_py_setter_def (cognitive 17) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:675 — pyo3_macros_backend::pymethod::impl_py_setter_def has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (12 pts), match/switch 3, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyFields · ×5

TooManyFields: PyConfig pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/initconfig.rs:84 — TooManyFields — 81 stored fields. The bar is 30 stored fields; this is 51 over it, 2.70× the bar. This is width in DATA, not behaviour: every reader that takes the whole type couples to all of its fields, so a change to any one of them is a change every reader has to be checked against. To reduce it, group the fields that are read together by the same callers into a smaller type of their own, and have this one hold that type as a single member — each reader then names only the group it uses.
TooManyFields: PyTypeObject pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs:211 — TooManyFields — 58 stored fields. The bar is 30 stored fields; this is 28 over it, 1.93× the bar. This is width in DATA, not behaviour: every reader that takes the whole type couples to all of its fields, so a change to any one of them is a change every reader has to be checked against. To reduce it, group the fields that are read together by the same callers into a smaller type of their own, and have this one hold that type as a single member — each reader then names only the group it uses.
TooManyFields: PyTypeObject39Snapshot src/internal/get_slot.rs:234 — TooManyFields — 49 stored fields. The bar is 30 stored fields; this is 19 over it, 1.63× the bar. This is width in DATA, not behaviour: every reader that takes the whole type couples to all of its fields, so a change to any one of them is a change every reader has to be checked against. To reduce it, group the fields that are read together by the same callers into a smaller type of their own, and have this one hold that type as a single member — each reader then names only the group it uses.
TooManyFields: PyNumberMethods pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs:120 — TooManyFields — 36 stored fields. The bar is 30 stored fields; this is 6 over it, 1.20× the bar. This is width in DATA, not behaviour: every reader that takes the whole type couples to all of its fields, so a change to any one of them is a change every reader has to be checked against. To reduce it, group the fields that are read together by the same callers into a smaller type of their own, and have this one hold that type as a single member — each reader then names only the group it uses.
TooManyFields: PyNumberMethods39Snapshot src/internal/get_slot.rs:149 — TooManyFields — 36 stored fields. The bar is 30 stored fields; this is 6 over it, 1.20× the bar. This is width in DATA, not behaviour: every reader that takes the whole type couples to all of its fields, so a change to any one of them is a change every reader has to be checked against. To reduce it, group the fields that are read together by the same callers into a smaller type of their own, and have this one hold that type as a single member — each reader then names only the group it uses.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:134 — pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:134-139 | pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:648-655 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:312 — pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:312-317 | pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:328-333 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:511 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:511-516 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:489-494 — before extracting anything, compare `pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs` and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src/impl_/pyclass.rs:1431 — src/impl_/pyclass.rs:1431-1436 | src/impl_/pyclass.rs:1472-1477 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs:179 — pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs:179-184 | pyo3-ffi-check/src/main.rs:197-202 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · pyo3_macros_backend · ×4

pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl (cyclomatic 37) pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:100 — pyo3_macros_backend::module::pymodule_module_impl has cyclomatic complexity 37 (threshold 15). Of this number, 32 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to one function item inside it that branches. 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.
pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::method_introspection_code (cyclomatic 21) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:396 — pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::method_introspection_code has cyclomatic complexity 21 (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.
pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::add_shared_proto_slots (cyclomatic 20) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:315 — pyo3_macros_backend::pyimpl::add_shared_proto_slots has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
pyo3_macros_backend::introspection::arguments_introspection_data (cyclomatic 18) pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:229 — pyo3_macros_backend::introspection::arguments_introspection_data has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:165 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:165-176 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:83-94 — before extracting anything, compare `pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs` and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:553 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:553-564 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:570-581 — before extracting anything, compare `pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs` and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1166 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1166-1177 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1280-1291 — 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 (12 lines × 2) src/types/any.rs:1397 — src/types/any.rs:1397-1408 | src/types/sequence.rs:311-322 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:786 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:786-795 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:881-890 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/types/any.rs:1281 — src/types/any.rs:1281-1290 | src/types/dict.rs:300-309 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/types/sequence.rs:292 — src/types/sequence.rs:292-301 | src/types/sequence.rs:331-340 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/types/list.rs:358 — src/types/list.rs:358-367 | src/types/sequence.rs:266-275 — 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 × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:77 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:77-84 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:87-94 — 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) pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:412 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:412-419 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction.rs:426-433 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2836 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2836-2843 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2846-2853 — 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) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:482 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:482-489 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:388-395 — before extracting anything, compare `pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs` and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale · ×3

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale newsfragments/6056.added.md — Explain why PyThread_get_thread_ident is needed (thread identity on non-Pypy builds) and the trade-off of adding it to ffi crate
No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale newsfragments/6188.changed.md — Add why FromPyObject was deprecated (e.g. generated code duplication) and the trade-offs of removing it (no longer able to convert from Python objects in this case)
No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale newsfragments/6195.fixed.md — Add why this binding is needed (link to private CPython symbol on <3.12) and the trade-offs of linking against unstable Python versions

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is stated · ×3

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is stated newsfragments/6324.changed.md — Add a Context section explaining why helper types for Python types are needed (e.g. ergonomic API) and a Consequences section noting trade-offs such as increased module size or breaking existing code that relied on deprecated aliases
No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is stated newsfragments/6365.fixed.md — Add why this nested-directory naming convention matters (e.g. readability, tooling) and the consequences of changing it (reworking existing stubs, breaking tests that reference the parent directory)
No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision is stated newsfragments/6421.removed.md — Add a Context section explaining why FFI exceptions like Py_RecursionErrorInst are removed (e.g. they are not present in supported versions) and a Consequences section noting any breakage to customers who rely on those symbols

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×3

MethodTooLong: PyClassImplsBuilder.impl_pyclassimpl pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2789 — MethodTooLong — impl_pyclassimpl runs 209 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 109 over it, 2.09× 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.
MethodTooLong: FnSpec.get_wrapper_function pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:818 — MethodTooLong — get_wrapper_function runs 165 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 65 over it, 1.65× 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.
MethodTooLong: InterpreterConfig.from_interpreter pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:419 — MethodTooLong — from_interpreter runs 127 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 27 over it, 1.27× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×3

TooManyMethods: Py src/instance.rs:1494 — TooManyMethods — 45 methods, declared across 3 files: src/instance.rs (41), types/string.rs (3), types/bytes.rs (1). The bar is 30 methods; this is 15 over it, 1.50× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. This type is on a published API surface — a cargo-semver-checks gate in CI (REDACTED) declares its compatibility contractual — so moving members onto a smaller type is a breaking change for every consumer, not a local refactor. To reduce it, treat the split as an API migration: move each cohesive group onto its own published type and keep the old members as deprecated forwards for a deprecation period, removing them at the next compatibility break. Where the surface has to stay as it is, that is a decision to record rather than a change to make.
TooManyMethods: Bound src/instance.rs:74 — TooManyMethods — 37 methods, declared across 4 files: src/instance.rs (33), types/any.rs (2), internal/get_slot.rs (1), types/iterator.rs (1). The bar is 30 methods; this is 7 over it, 1.23× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. This type is on a published API surface — a cargo-semver-checks gate in CI (REDACTED) declares its compatibility contractual — so moving members onto a smaller type is a breaking change for every consumer, not a local refactor. To reduce it, treat the split as an API migration: move each cohesive group onto its own published type and keep the old members as deprecated forwards for a deprecation period, removing them at the next compatibility break. Where the surface has to stay as it is, that is a decision to record rather than a change to make.
TooManyMethods: PyErr src/err/mod.rs:44 — TooManyMethods — 31 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. This type is on a published API surface — a cargo-semver-checks gate in CI (REDACTED) declares its compatibility contractual — so moving members onto a smaller type is a breaking change for every consumer, not a local refactor. To reduce it, treat the split as an API migration: move each cohesive group onto its own published type and keep the old members as deprecated forwards for a deprecation period, removing them at the next compatibility break. Where the surface has to stay as it is, that is a decision to record rather than a change to make.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs:53 — pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/object.rs:53-67 | pyo3-ffi/src/pybuffer.rs:32-46 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:249 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:249-263 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:312-326 — 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 (15 lines × 2) src/types/datetime.rs:566 — src/types/datetime.rs:566-580 | src/types/datetime.rs:769-783 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/impl_/pyclass.rs:1411 — src/impl_/pyclass.rs:1411-1421 | src/impl_/pyclass.rs:1452-1462 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/types/frozenset.rs:163 — src/types/frozenset.rs:163-173 | src/types/set.rs:152-162 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/bytearrayobject.rs:37 — pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/bytearrayobject.rs:37-47 | pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/listobject.rs:31-41 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

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

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:284 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:284-290 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:307-313 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) src/err/mod.rs:358 — src/err/mod.rs:358-365 | src/err/mod.rs:544-550 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:103 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:103-109 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:473-479 — before extracting anything, compare `pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs` and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) src/types/mapping.rs:60 — src/types/mapping.rs:60-64 | src/types/sequence.rs:59-63 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) src/types/any.rs:1370 — src/types/any.rs:1370-1374 | src/types/typeobject.rs:200-204 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:1605 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:1605-1609 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pymethod.rs:1659-1663 — 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.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×3

Off the main sequence: pyo3-macros-backend — pyo3-macros-backend: abstractness 0.04, instability 0.00, distance 0.96 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 1 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: pyo3-build-config — pyo3-build-config: abstractness 0.07, instability 0.00, distance 0.93 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 7 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: pyo3-ffi — pyo3-ffi: abstractness 0.01, instability 0.25, distance 0.74 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 3 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · pyo3_ffi_check_macro · ×2

pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields (cyclomatic 27) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:190 — pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields has cyclomatic complexity 27 (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.
pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_functions (cyclomatic 20) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:640 — pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_functions 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 · FnSpec · ×2

FnSpec::parse_fn_type (cyclomatic 21) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:684 — FnSpec::parse_fn_type has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
FnSpec::get_wrapper_function (cyclomatic 16) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:818 — FnSpec::get_wrapper_function has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Imports · ×2

Imports::serialize_expr (cognitive 34) pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:478 — Imports::serialize_expr has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (22 pts), match/switch 3 (7 pts), loops 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 18). 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.
Imports::create (cognitive 33) pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:370 — Imports::create has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (24 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · pyo3_ffi_check_macro · ×2

pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields (cognitive 31) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:190 — pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_fields has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (18 pts), boolean chains 9, match/switch 3, loops 1 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_functions (cognitive 17) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:640 — pyo3_ffi_check_macro::for_all_functions has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (11 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FnSpec · ×2

FnSpec::get_wrapper_function (cognitive 28) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:818 — FnSpec::get_wrapper_function has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (22 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
FnSpec::parse_fn_type (cognitive 21) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:684 — FnSpec::parse_fn_type has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · pyo3_build_config · ×2

pyo3_build_config::impl_::search_lib_dir (cognitive 23) pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:2165 — pyo3_build_config::impl_::search_lib_dir has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
pyo3_build_config::impl_::default_lib_name_windows (cognitive 18) pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:2398 — pyo3_build_config::impl_::default_lib_name_windows has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (16 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · pyo3_introspection · ×2

pyo3_introspection::stubs::push_docstring (cognitive 22) pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:266 — pyo3_introspection::stubs::push_docstring has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (17 pts), loops 2 (4 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.
pyo3_introspection::stubs::function_stubs (cognitive 17) pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:181 — pyo3_introspection::stubs::function_stubs has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (13 pts), loops 4 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2

Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/types/dict.rs:242 — src/types/dict.rs:242-256 | src/types/frozendict.rs:191-205 | src/types/frozenset.rs:178-195 | src/types/set.rs:167-181 | src/types/set.rs:186-200 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) examples/decorator/noxfile.py:8 — examples/decorator/noxfile.py:8-16 | examples/getitem/noxfile.py:8-16 | examples/maturin-starter/noxfile.py:8-17 | examples/plugin/plugin_api/noxfile.py:8-16 | examples/word-count/noxfile.py:10-18 — 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 (9 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) pytests/src/datetime.rs:130 — pytests/src/datetime.rs:130-138 | pytests/src/datetime.rs:146-154 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) src/types/weakref/proxy.rs:78 — src/types/weakref/proxy.rs:78-86 | src/types/weakref/reference.rs:87-95 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

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

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:413 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:413-419 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/module.rs:501-507 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction.rs:427-433 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) src/types/list.rs:321 — src/types/list.rs:321-327 | src/types/sequence.rs:227-233 | src/types/tuple.rs:281-287 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once.

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

Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) src/types/any.rs:1355 — src/types/any.rs:1355-1359 | src/types/mapping.rs:125-129 | src/types/sequence.rs:171-175 — 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) src/types/weakref/anyref.rs:332 — src/types/weakref/anyref.rs:332-336 | src/types/weakref/proxy.rs:171-175 | src/types/weakref/reference.rs:179-183 — 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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Imports · ×1

Imports::serialize_expr (cyclomatic 28) pyo3-introspection/src/stubs.rs:478 — Imports::serialize_expr has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · PyClassPyO3Option · ×1

PyClassPyO3Option::parse (cyclomatic 26) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:130 — PyClassPyO3Option::parse has cyclomatic complexity 26 (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 · PyStaticExpr · ×1

PyStaticExpr::fmt (cyclomatic 26) src/inspect.rs:256 — PyStaticExpr::fmt has cyclomatic complexity 26 (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 · InterpreterConfig · ×1

InterpreterConfig::from_reader (cyclomatic 19) pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:706 — InterpreterConfig::from_reader has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content (cyclomatic 19) · ×1

glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content (cyclomatic 19) guide/glossary_linker.py:84 — glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · IntrospectionNode · ×1

IntrospectionNode::add_to_serialization (cyclomatic 18) pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:392 — IntrospectionNode::add_to_serialization has cyclomatic complexity 18 (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 · PyClassImplsBuilder · ×1

PyClassImplsBuilder::impl_pyclassimpl (cyclomatic 17) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2789 — PyClassImplsBuilder::impl_pyclassimpl has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: PyClassPyO3Options::set_option (cyclomatic 25) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · FunctionSignature · ×1

FunctionSignature::from_arguments_and_attribute (cyclomatic 17) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction/signature.rs:434 — FunctionSignature::from_arguments_and_attribute 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 · noxfile.check_feature_powerset (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

noxfile.check_feature_powerset (cyclomatic 16) noxfile.py:1614 — noxfile.check_feature_powerset 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.

D17 · Explicit Debt · HackComment · ×1

HackComment pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyimpl.rs:504 — // Hack to return Self while implementing IntoPyObject — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment repeated across 30 files · ×1

TodoComment repeated across 30 files src/pyclass_init.rs:1 — The identical TodoComment appears in 30 files (30 occurrences) — almost certainly one boilerplate line from a single migration or decision, not 30 independent debts. Fix the systemic cause once rather than file-by-file. Text: "// TODO https://github.com/PyO3/pyo3/issues/5487". Source code is not a task system: track the cleanup where tasks live. (Every occurrence still counts toward the score and metrics.)

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content (cognitive 35) · ×1

glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content (cognitive 35) guide/glossary_linker.py:84 — glossary_linker.link_terms_in_content has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (25 pts), loops 5 (8 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · IntrospectionNode · ×1

IntrospectionNode::add_to_serialization (cognitive 30) pyo3-macros-backend/src/introspection.rs:392 — IntrospectionNode::add_to_serialization has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 16). 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 · FunctionSignature · ×1

FunctionSignature::from_arguments_and_attribute (cognitive 30) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction/signature.rs:434 — FunctionSignature::from_arguments_and_attribute has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (24 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts), loops 2 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · noxfile._raw_dylib_x86_private_functions (cognitive 29) · ×1

noxfile._raw_dylib_x86_private_functions (cognitive 29) noxfile.py:1534 — noxfile._raw_dylib_x86_private_functions has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (22 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 20). 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 · PyStaticExpr · ×1

PyStaticExpr::fmt (cognitive 28) src/inspect.rs:256 — PyStaticExpr::fmt has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), match/switch 4 (9 pts), loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 15). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PyClassPyO3Option · ×1

PyClassPyO3Option::parse (cognitive 26) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:130 — PyClassPyO3Option::parse has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26. 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 · PyClassImplsBuilder · ×1

PyClassImplsBuilder::impl_pyclassimpl (cognitive 26) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2789 — PyClassImplsBuilder::impl_pyclassimpl has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22, match/switch 3, boolean chains 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 · FunctionDescription · ×1

FunctionDescription::handle_kwargs (cognitive 24) src/impl_/extract_argument.rs:719 — FunctionDescription::handle_kwargs has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (23 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · noxfile.check_test_features (cognitive 23) · ×1

noxfile.check_test_features (cognitive 23) noxfile.py:1158 — noxfile.check_test_features has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), loops 4 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · tabs.changeTab (cognitive 22) · ×1

tabs.changeTab (cognitive 22) guide/theme/tabs.js:7 — tabs.changeTab has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · noxfile.format_guide (cognitive 20) · ×1

noxfile.format_guide (cognitive 20) noxfile.py:963 — noxfile.format_guide has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (11 pts), loops 4 (9 pts) (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 · noxfile._format_ffi_extern (cognitive 20) · ×1

noxfile._format_ffi_extern (cognitive 20) noxfile.py:1012 — noxfile._format_ffi_extern has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (13 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 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 · SelfType · ×1

SelfType::receiver (cognitive 19) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:444 — SelfType::receiver has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FieldAttribute · ×1

FieldAttribute::parse (cognitive 18) pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:122 — FieldAttribute::parse has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (18 pts) (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 · Container · ×1

Container::new (cognitive 18) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:164 — Container::new has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (13 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · pyo3_ffi · ×1

pyo3_ffi::compat::py_3_15::_PyBytesWriter_Resize_impl (cognitive 16) pyo3-ffi/src/compat/py_3_15.rs:140 — pyo3_ffi::compat::py_3_15::_PyBytesWriter_Resize_impl has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (16 pts) (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 · SignatureItem · ×1

SignatureItem::parse (cognitive 16) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction/signature.rs:96 — SignatureItem::parse has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 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 · noxfile.check_feature_powerset (cognitive 16) · ×1

noxfile.check_feature_powerset (cognitive 16) noxfile.py:1614 — noxfile.check_feature_powerset has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 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.

D20 · ADR Quality · Decision is a bare "drop support for Python 3.8." with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

Decision is a bare "drop support for Python 3.8." with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6128.packaging.md — Add the problem (e.g. end-of-life of PyPI packages requiring it) and the consequences (replacing compatible packages, migration cost)

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why convert to num-bigint now) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why convert to num-bigint now) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6144.changed.md — Add the problem motivating the change (e.g., high cost of converting from int/float to num-bigint on Python 3.14+), the decision it replaces, and its consequences such as API surface area or compatibility with older code

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Add init config to `ffi` crate" is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Add init config to `ffi` crate" is present newsfragments/6152.added.md — State why init config matters for ffi (e.g. loading shared libraries or environment variables) and document any trade-offs such as increased startup cost or dependency on a new module

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Enable `PyLong(Writer|Export)` api on abi3 from 3.15+ for fast u128/i128 conversions" is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Enable `PyLong(Writer|Export)` api on abi3 from 3.15+ for fast u128/i128 conversions" is present newsfragments/6160.added.md — Add a Context section explaining why u128/i128 conversion speed matters (e.g., high-performance data loading, serialization) and a Consequences section noting trade-offs such as ABI compatibility with older versions or the cost of maintaining the new API

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "removed deprecated `FromPyObject` blanket implementation" is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "removed deprecated `FromPyObject` blanket implementation" is present newsfragments/6188.removed.md — Add a Context section explaining why FromPyObject was deprecated (e.g. it now delegates to the correct overload) and a Consequences section noting any breaking changes or new usage requirements

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why deprecate from_build_env in favor of an explicit constructor) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why deprecate from_build_env in favor of an explicit constructor) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6192.changed.md — Add the problem motivating the change (environment-based abi selection is fragile/cannot express version intent) and document the trade-offs: new callers must use the explicit constructor, ABI compatibility for existing builds

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Added FFI bindings for CPython eval-frame get/set API" is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Added FFI bindings for CPython eval-frame get/set API" is present newsfragments/6195.added.md — Explain why FFI access to eval_frame get/set matters (e.g. interoperability with Rust/other languages) and document any trade-offs such as runtime cost or ABI compatibility

D20 · ADR Quality · No Context · ×1

No Context: the problem is real but there is no explanation of why attaching without decrefs should skip the deferred-decref pool's mutex newsfragments/6200.changed.md — Add a Context section describing the concurrent-attach model and when attach would serialize on a global mutex (e.g. during a free-threaded scan)

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why extract set/frozenset to Rust) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why extract set/frozenset to Rust) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6225.changed.md — Add a Context section explaining why Python set/frozenset extraction is costly in Rust (e.g. repeated allocations), then an explicit Decision stating preallocated destination sets are used, and a Consequences section covering trade-offs like allocation cost of the initial set plus the per-element copy.

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem motivation and no consequences/trade-offs; only the API surface is described · ×1

No context/problem motivation and no consequences/trade-offs; only the API surface is described newsfragments/6227.added.md — Add a Context section explaining why GIL-enabled CPython watchers are needed (e.g. avoiding cross-GIL race conditions) and a Consequences section on trade-offs such as thread-safety of the added APIs

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the method signature is stated · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the method signature is stated newsfragments/6251.changed.md — Add why a concrete &mut dyn Write receiver is needed (e.g. to avoid requiring an extra Box<dyn Write> in the call site) and the trade-offs of using a non-owning writer

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences; only the decision "Add tss api to ffi crate" is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences; only the decision "Add tss api to ffi crate" is present newsfragments/6262.added.md — State why TSS API integration with the FFI crate matters (e.g. secure shared memory, cross-language ABI compatibility) and document trade-offs such as build-time overhead or dependency complexity

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why the change was needed) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why the change was needed) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6271.added.1.md — Add a Context section explaining why initialisers cannot fail (e.g. side-effect-only code that must run once) and a Consequences section noting the silent-discarding behaviour is non-obvious to callers

D20 · ADR Quality · The title is informative but there is no context/problem statement and no consequences/trade-offs for this experimental inspection change · ×1

The title is informative but there is no context/problem statement and no consequences/trade-offs for this experimental inspection change newsfragments/6273.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining why repeated members in a type union are duplicated (e.g. generated code readability) and a Consequences section noting the trade-off of adding whitespace on both sides

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision statement with no rationale or impact · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision statement with no rationale or impact newsfragments/6274.fixed.md — Add why introspection over Option<T> as T is needed (e.g. avoid yielding None to an iterator) and the trade-offs of breaking existing inspect code

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why these GC functions need to be exported) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why these GC functions need to be exported) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6299.added.md — Add a Context section explaining why FFI access to PyObject_GC_Track/UnTrack matters for PyPy interoperability, and a Consequences section noting the cost of adding two new C API symbols

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; the title names a lint but the body is an empty decision with only the lint name · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; the title names a lint but the body is an empty decision with only the lint name newsfragments/6309.fixed.md — State why clone_on_copy is triggered (copy-on-copy semantics) and the problem it flags (unnecessary clippy warnings), plus the trade-offs of disabling the lint (e.g. false positives on intentional copy behavior)

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why move the types) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why move the types) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6324.changed.1.md — Add a Context section explaining why pyo3::types::PyMutex was moved out of sync to clarify migration needs, and a Consequences section noting that users must update their code to use the new module path

D20 · ADR Quality · The body is a bare list of function/method additions with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

The body is a bare list of function/method additions with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6349.added.md — Add the problem motivating each new API (e.g. MBCS decoding vs code pages) and the trade-offs of adding these functions to the Unicode module

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences; only a bare list of added functions with no rationale · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences; only a bare list of added functions with no rationale newsfragments/6350.added.md — Explain why these float-packing/unpacking functions are needed (e.g. interoperability with C or third-party libraries) and document the trade-offs such as API surface growth

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; the title is generic · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; the title is generic newsfragments/6351.added.md — State why accessors are needed (e.g. to extract signature, inspect parameters) and list trade-offs such as API surface growth

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line rationale is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line rationale is present newsfragments/6360.fixed.md — Add why re-exporting stub-generated submodules matters (e.g. type-checkers see them as attributes of the parent) and document the trade-offs: generated code may appear opaque to callers, and re-exports can break existing lookup tables

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why the disjoint_base decoration) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why the disjoint_base decoration) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6362.added.md — Add a Context section explaining why extending a base's instance layout is problematic for code reuse and a Consequences section on trade-offs such as requiring typing_extensions for Python <3.15

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why inspect trailing args instead of omitting them) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why inspect trailing args instead of omitting them) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6363.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining the problem (e.g. callers expect trailing defaults to be omitted but introspectible) and a Consequences section noting trade-offs like slower lookup for unbound arguments

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a decision "Optimize PyBytes · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a decision "Optimize PyBytes::as_bytes() in the unlimited API" is present newsfragments/6377.changed.md — Add why as_bytes() matters (e.g. high-throughput streaming) and its trade-offs (relocation cost of new bytes, copy vs slice semantics)}

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the method names are stated · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the method names are stated newsfragments/6382.added.md — Explain why slice-pointer semantics matter for Fortran interoperability (e.g. passing a contiguous array to a C/Fortran function) and note any memory/ownership trade-offs

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why the rendering changed) and no consequences/trade-offs; only a bug/feature description with no rationale · ×1

No context/problem (why the rendering changed) and no consequences/trade-offs; only a bug/feature description with no rationale newsfragments/6393.fixed.md — Add the problem statement: explain why empty tuple type hints are rendered as invalid `tuple[]` instead of the intended `tuple[()]`, and document the trade-offs such as how it affects existing code

D20 · ADR Quality · Title is informative but the body states only the decision (escape stub docstrings) with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

Title is informative but the body states only the decision (escape stub docstrings) with no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6394.fixed.md — Add why escape stub docstrings matters (e.g. prevent syntax errors during import or type-checking) and note any trade-offs such as false positives

D20 · ADR Quality · The title is informative but the body gives no context (why PyBuffer annotation failed) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

The title is informative but the body gives no context (why PyBuffer annotation failed) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6395.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining why Python <3.12 requires typing_extensions.Buffer instead of collections.abc.Buffer, and a Consequences section noting that this change breaks backwards compatibility with existing inspect code

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why the annotation is needed) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why the annotation is needed) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6396.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining why SupportsIndex/SupportsFloat annotations matter for NumPy scalars and a Consequences section noting that it adds runtime annotation parsing overhead

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a vague title "Fix string constants containing control characters rendering as invalid Python in `Display for PyStaticExpr`" with no rationale · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a vague title "Fix string constants containing control characters rendering as invalid Python in `Display for PyStaticExpr`" with no rationale newsfragments/6397.fixed.md — Add the problem (e.g. strings like 'print(

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the bug title · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the bug title newsfragments/6404.fixed.md — State what interpreter/execution path triggered this crash (e.g. a detached thread is terminated during reattach) and document the failure mode plus its real-world impact, then list the consequences such as re-attaching behavior or stack-trace loss

D20 · ADR Quality · Only a decision is stated; no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

Only a decision is stated; no context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6406.packaging.md — Add the problem (e.g. GraalVM/Python interoperability gap) and document trade-offs such as build/tooling complexity or dependency requirements

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (which Python versions the bug affects) and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale · ×1

No context/problem (which Python versions the bug affects) and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no rationale newsfragments/6410.fixed.2.md — Add the affected Python version range (3.11 and older), describe what the FFI definition PyVectorcall_Call does and why it fails to link, and document the consequence (e.g., incompatible codebase)

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line title stating the fix · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line title stating the fix newsfragments/6410.fixed.3.md — Add the problem (DLL load failures on Windows with PyPy when raw-dylib linking is disabled) and its root cause, then document the trade-offs of disabling raw-dylib linking

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line title with the fix · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line title with the fix newsfragments/6410.fixed.md — State why raw-dylib linking is disabled (e.g. compatibility with older tools) and describe the failure mode it prevents, plus any trade-offs such as increased binary size or dependency on native libraries

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Implement `Copy` for `PyVisit" is stated · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Implement `Copy` for `PyVisit" is stated newsfragments/6412.added.md — Add a Context section explaining why Copy is needed (e.g. interoperability with Rust) and a Consequences section on trade-offs like runtime cost of Copy

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why annotate these types with SupportsGetItem/Series instead of abc.Sequence) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why annotate these types with SupportsGetItem/Series instead of abc.Sequence) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6413.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining the motivation (e.g. NumPy arrays require SupportsGetItem/Series, current annotations are too weak) and a Consequences section noting false-positive risks and why _typeshed is preferred

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why these GC timing hooks are needed) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why these GC timing hooks are needed) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6419.added.md — Add a Context section explaining the problem (e.g., that PyModule_GetState is not visible during GC) and a Consequences section on trade-offs such as ABI compatibility with older versions

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no framing · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only a one-line decision with no framing newsfragments/6420.fixed.md — Add the problem (e.g. `#[classmethod]` dunder methods are dropped before the full function call completes) and document the trade-offs of keeping them alive (stack allocation cost, GC pressure)

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Fix linker errors on PyPy for outdated FFI definitions where PyPy moved from a function to a macro." is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Fix linker errors on PyPy for outdated FFI definitions where PyPy moved from a function to a macro." is present newsfragments/6422.fixed.md — Add why this change matters (e.g. existing code relies on the old function signature) and what breaks if reverted, plus any trade-offs such as increased build/compile overhead

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why the aliasing bug matters) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why the aliasing bug matters) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6424.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining why aliasing a built-in class like `Array` to an experimental stub is dangerous, then a Consequences section on how it breaks existing code and what alternatives exist

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem (why pyfunction was marked METH_STATIC) and no consequences/trade-offs · ×1

No context/problem (why pyfunction was marked METH_STATIC) and no consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6428.fixed.md — Add the problem statement: why `#[pyfunction]` is marked METH_STATIC in PyO3 0.28, what it causes (__self__ None/calls slower), and the trade-offs of marking it METH_STATIC (e.g., breaking existing code that relies on __self__). Then document any alternatives or workarounds.

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Add pypy3.12 dll to list of ffi sources" is present · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the decision "Add pypy3.12 dll to list of ffi sources" is present newsfragments/6429.added.md — Explain why this change matters (e.g., compatibility with new Python versions) and document any trade-offs such as increased build/dependency overhead

D20 · ADR Quality · No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the task is stated · ×1

No context/problem and no consequences/trade-offs; only the task is stated newsfragments/6450.fixed.md — Add a Context section explaining when Zoned extraction fails (nonexistent datetimes) and why it matters, then a Consequences section covering trade-offs such as invalid-epoch-handling behavior or rework to fix

D20 · ADR Quality · Title is informative but the body states only that Access traits are made available for datetime and gives no context/problem or consequences/trade-offs · ×1

Title is informative but the body states only that Access traits are made available for datetime and gives no context/problem or consequences/trade-offs newsfragments/6452.changed.md — Add a Context section explaining why datetime Access traits were previously inaccessible (e.g. ABI3 compatibility) and a Consequences section on trade-offs such as breaking existing code that relied on trait names

D20 · ADR Quality · Only the decision (MSRV bump) and no context/problem or consequences are stated · ×1

Only the decision (MSRV bump) and no context/problem or consequences are stated newsfragments/6459.packaging.md — Add a Context section explaining why MSRV was bumped (e.g., compatibility with new dependencies, breaking changes), and a Consequences section covering migration effort, runtime cost, and any new tooling needed

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Naming inconsistency for context attachment methods. 'context' implies a static string or simple value, while 'with_context' implies a lazy evaluation (closure). In many Rust error handling libraries (like this one appears to be, given the `Error`/`ErrorReport` types), these are often unified under a single name (e.g., `with_context` or `context`) with overloads or distinct parameter types, or clearly distinguished by prefix (e.g., `context_static` vs `context_lazy`). Here, the verb 'with' is inconsistently applied. · ×1

Naming inconsistency for context attachment methods. 'context' implies a static string or simple value, while 'with_context' implies a lazy evaluation (closure). In many Rust error handling libraries (like this one appears to be, given the `Error`/`ErrorReport` types), these are often unified under a single name (e.g., `with_context` or `context`) with overloads or distinct parameter types, or clearly distinguished by prefix (e.g., `context_static` vs `context_lazy`). Here, the verb 'with' is inconsistently applied. — Rename `Context.context` to `Context.with_context` (if it accepts a string) or rename `Context.with_context` to `Context.context_lazy` to make the distinction between eager and lazy evaluation explicit in the name, or unify them if the API design allows a single `with_context` that accepts both via trait bounds. (signatures: Context.context(message: impl Into<String>): Result | Context.with_context(message: impl FnOnce() -> String): Result)

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

REDACTED

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×1

ClassTooLong: InterpreterConfig pyo3-build-config/src/impl_.rs:146 — ClassTooLong — 449 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 26 methods, 2 blocks, lines 146-922. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 49 over it, 1.12× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×1

REDACTED

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling clique · ×1

Change coupling clique: ellipsis.rs, none.rs, notimplemented.rs src/types/ellipsis.rs — 3 files — `src/types/ellipsis.rs`, `src/types/none.rs`, `src/types/notimplemented.rs` — all change together with no explicit dependency: a fully-connected co-change clique, not 3 separate couplings. They share one concern (thin parallel siblings over a common abstraction), so extract the shared part into ONE unit and the whole clique's coupling clears at once — you do not need to break each pair individually.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (28 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member pair (28 shared lines) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:510 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:510-598 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:488-625 — These two members are variants of one another: 28 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:75 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:75-96 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:207-262 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:904-922 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction.rs:302-327 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (40 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (40 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2021 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2021-2060 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2086-2125 — 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 (21 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) src/types/datetime.rs:582 — src/types/datetime.rs:582-602 | src/types/datetime.rs:785-805 — 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 (16–17 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) src/types/dict.rs:270 — src/types/dict.rs:270-286 | src/types/frozendict.rs:219-234 — 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 (12–14 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1501 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1501-1514 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1718-1729 — 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 (12–13 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2000 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2000-2012 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2067-2078 — 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 (12 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) src/types/dict.rs:245 — src/types/dict.rs:245-256 | src/types/frozendict.rs:194-205 | src/types/frozenset.rs:184-195 | src/types/set.rs:170-181 | src/types/set.rs:189-200 — there are 5 copies across 4 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:77 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:77-88 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:209-220 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:906-917 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

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

Duplicated block (10–12 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:518 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs:518-529 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs:499-508 — before extracting anything, compare `pyo3-macros-backend/src/frompyobject.rs` and `pyo3-macros-backend/src/intopyobject.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:76 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/derive_attributes.rs:76-86 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:208-218 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:905-915 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyfunction.rs:303-313 — there are 4 copies across 3 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 (9–11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9–11 lines × 2) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:519 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:519-527 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1337-1347 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1137 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1137-1144 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:1266-1273 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/pyclass.rs:2773-2780 — 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.

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

Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) src/types/bytearray.rs:45 — src/types/bytearray.rs:45-53 | src/types/bytes.rs:83-91 | src/types/string.rs:182-190 | src/types/string.rs:196-204 — there are 4 copies across 3 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 (6 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:33 — pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:33-41 | pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:131-136 | pyo3-ffi-check/macro/src/lib.rs:644-650 — 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:752 — pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:752-760 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:765-773 | pyo3-macros-backend/src/method.rs:778-786 — 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16–21 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (16–21 lines × 2) noxfile.py:1487 — noxfile.py:1487-1502 | noxfile.py:1509-1529 — 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 `noxfile.py:1487` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `noxfile.py:1502` calls `log` and `noxfile.py:1530` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 5) examples/decorator/noxfile.py:8 — examples/decorator/noxfile.py:8-16 | examples/getitem/noxfile.py:8-16 | examples/maturin-starter/noxfile.py:8-17 | examples/plugin/plugin_api/noxfile.py:8-16 | examples/word-count/noxfile.py:10-18 — `examples/decorator/noxfile.py` and `examples/getitem/noxfile.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 1 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 10 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.

Minor — 7 finding(s)

D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 2 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: guide/glossary_linker.py, pyo3-ffi/src/cpython/pyatomic.rs. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.

D16 · Bus Factor · Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1

Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 1 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (3 single-owned of 208 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 208 of the 319 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above.

D26 · Project Cohesion · Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 2 of 10 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 6.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (58023 LoC, 388 public types across 16 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1

Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 1 of 208 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 208 of the 319 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: src/types/genericalias.rs. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 1/4 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`, `pyo3-ffi-check`, `pyo3-introspection`.

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-45dda2a108f5472bb13cb3617fa9c665/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-45dda2a108f5472bb13cb3617fa9c665/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 .	165	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	2	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.	0	—
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	0	—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy	disclosure	—	disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.	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 01a0ea33-ea5f-7a7f-886a-8705e4a4d442 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

PyO3/pyo3

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 · 89% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Architecture · 95% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 89% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Readiness · 71% · Strong ·

At a glance — Security · 74% · Adequate · gated by D29 ·

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

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts