Public report of RicoSuter/NSwag, published 23 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive report Measured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey → Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 23 October 2026, 11:46 UTC · Survey ID cd_9bef36bef52d4bb988e967328c0095f1

RicoSuter/NSwag

Measured 23 October 2026, 11:43 UTC, at code version 63daf8f

No regression since the last survey Code coverage: not measuredBoundary Type-Coupling: not measured

A regression is a drop of 0.5 points or more in the score, or of 2.5 or more out of 10 in a dimension, since the last survey.

Code coverage is not measured: No coverage collector is wired up.

Boundary Type-Coupling is not measured: Bounded contexts not declared.

CAI score 48out of 100 Weak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Down 1 since the last survey

The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.

Architecture 99 Exemplary Maturity 68 Adequate Performance 60 Adequate Code Health 57 Adequate Accessibility 52 Adequate Production Readiness 49 Weak Security and Compliance 41 Weak

A medium codebase: 22,061 lines of product code in 68 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.4 person-years · Weakest lens: Security and Compliance, 41

Findings by how serious they are

68 critical 150 serious 80 minor

8 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
23 October 2026, 11:43 UTC

A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.

The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸

76of 80 dimensions measured by tools. The other 4 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
277of 298 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 21 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
80dimensions across 7 lenses, read from 22,061 lines of product code in 68 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

RicoSuter/NSwag scores 48 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while six of its seven lenses score higher still: Architecture at 99, rated Exemplary, Maturity at 68, Performance at 60, Code Health at 57 and Accessibility at 52, all rated Adequate, and Production Readiness at 49, rated Weak.

The score is lower than those six because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Security and Compliance, which scores 41 and is rated Weak. Its Supply-chain Provenance & Signing dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Security and Compliance can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life and to encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault, and if Security and Compliance rose to 70, the score would rise from 48 to about 54.

68 findings are critical: 33 in Explicit Debt, 22 in Static Analysis (SAST), five in Project dependency cycles, two in Page structure, two in Test Quality, one in Cryptographic Hygiene, one in Dependency Vulnerabilities, one in Secret Scanning and one in Secrets (history).

Watchdog couldn't measure 4 dimensions in this code, among them Dependency Hygiene, IL Efficiency and Visual & motion safety, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 22,061 lines, which would take an estimated 0.4 person-years, around €54,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 57 Adequate Architecture 99 ★ Exemplary Maturity 68 Adequate, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 49 Weak, capped by Outbound HTTP resilience Security and Compliance 41 Weak, capped by Static Analysis (SAST), Supply-chain Provenance & Signing and Data Protection Accessibility 52 Adequate, capped by Page structure Performance 60 Adequate

A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Security and Compliance 41 · counts for 46%Production Readiness 49 · counts for 25%Accessibility 52 · counts for 14%Code Health 57 · counts for 8%Performance 60 · counts for 4%Maturity 68 · counts for 2%Architecture 99 · counts for 1%

If Security and Compliance rose from 41 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 48 to about 54.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Business logic 23%Supporting code 30%Tests 47%Generated by tools 0%
New since the last survey: 47 findings

These 47 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 9 October 2026.

Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.

Fixed since the last survey: 70 findings

These 70 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 9 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/AllowNullableBodyParametersTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/CSharpClientSettingsTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/FileDownloadTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/FileTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/FormParameterTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/HeadRequestTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/OptionalParameterTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/RequiredParameterTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/UseCancellationTokenTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/WrapResponsesTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/AngularJSTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/AngularJSTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/AngularTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/AngularTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/AxiosTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/AxiosTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/FetchTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/FetchTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/JQueryCallbacksTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/JQueryCallbacksTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/JQueryPromisesTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/JQueryPromisesTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/K6Tests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/K6Tests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/OperationParameterTests.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Inheritance/BaseController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/LanguagesController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/BindNeverQueryParameterController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/BodyParametersController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/ComplexQueryParametersController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/DefaultParametersController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/FileUploadController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/HeaderParametersController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/NullablePathParameterController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/PathParameterWithModelBinderController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/RenamedQueryParameterController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/SimpleQueryParametersController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Requests/ConsumesController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Requests/MultipartConsumesController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Requests/PostBodyController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Responses/JsonProducesController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Responses/NullableResponseController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Responses/TextProducesController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Responses/WrappedResponseController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/ResponsesController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/SwaggerExtensionDataController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/XmlDocsController.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: watchdog-controllerbase-missing-or-broken-authorization-csharp REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: watchdog-controllerbase-missing-or-broken-authorization-csharp REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: watchdog-controllerbase-missing-or-broken-authorization-csharp REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: watchdog-controllerbase-missing-or-broken-authorization-csharp REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: watchdog-controllerbase-missing-or-broken-authorization-csharp REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: watchdog-controllerbase-missing-or-broken-authorization-csharp REDACTED
  • Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: CheckForApplicationUpdate REDACTED
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetDocumentAsync src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: TryReadingUsingGetProperties src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/ProjectMetadata.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: ProcessAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: ProcessSingleAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: ProcessAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagCommandProcessor.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: ExecuteCommandLineAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagDocument.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: StartCommandLineProcessAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagDocument.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: LoadAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagDocumentBase.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateSwaggerDocumentAsync src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagDocumentBase.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateForControllersAsync src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: CreateDocumentAsync src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetDocumentAsync src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateDocumentAsync src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateAsync src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs
  • Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: CreateDocumentAsync src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs
Rebuild cost: about €54,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€18,000 to €91,000, for 297 to 956 hours of work, about 0.4 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problemStandard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor×0.7 at a score of 48. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
SizeMedium: 22,061 lines of product code
Comment linesThe estimate prices 17,786 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 22,061 lines but aren't priced as work.

How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty.

Top priorities

The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.

1
Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life — start with NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj.
Raises the score by about 3 points · Low effort · Platform End-of-Life
2
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault.
Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
Raises the score by about 6 points · Medium effort · Data Protection
3
Stop accepting every TLS certificate: remove the always-true validation callback so the platform verifies the chain, hostname and expiry.
If one self-signed certificate must be trusted, pin it by public key or thumbprint on the single handler that needs it and reject all others — never process-wide.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Cryptographic Hygiene

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €54,000 to build again, about 0.4 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Security and Compliance, at 41 (Weak). Security and Compliance is about how well the product is protected, and how it handles personal data. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Security and Compliance also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Security and Compliance grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Security and Compliance actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 3 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Platform End-of-Life findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

arch NSwag.Annotations Annotations NSwag.AspNet.Owin Owin NSwag.Generation.WebApi WebApi NSwag.AspNet.Owin->NSwag.Generation.WebApi NSwag.AspNet.WebApi WebApi NSwag.AspNet.WebApi->NSwag.Annotations NSwag.Core Core NSwag.AspNet.WebApi->NSwag.Core NSwag.AspNetCore AspNetCore NSwag.AspNetCore->NSwag.Annotations NSwag.Core.Yaml Yaml NSwag.AspNetCore->NSwag.Core.Yaml NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore AspNetCore NSwag.AspNetCore->NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher Launcher NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86 x86 NSwag.CodeGeneration CodeGeneration NSwag.CodeGeneration->NSwag.Core NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp CSharp NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp->NSwag.CodeGeneration NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript TypeScript NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript->NSwag.CodeGeneration NSwag.Commands Commands NSwag.Commands->NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp NSwag.Commands->NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript NSwag.Commands->NSwag.Core.Yaml NSwag.Commands->NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore NSwag.Console Console NSwag.Console->NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher NSwag.Console->NSwag.Commands NSwag.Console.x86 x86 NSwag.Console.x86->NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86 NSwag.Console.x86->NSwag.Commands NSwag.ConsoleCore ConsoleCore NSwag.ConsoleCore->NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher NSwag.ConsoleCore->NSwag.Commands NSwag.Core.Yaml->NSwag.Core NSwag.Generation Generation NSwag.Generation->NSwag.Core NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore->NSwag.Generation NSwag.Generation.WebApi->NSwag.Generation NSwagStudio NSwagStudio NSwagStudio->NSwag.Commands NSwagStudio->NSwag.Generation.WebApi _build _build

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.

56 modules, with 104 dependencies between them. 5 loops run through 15 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 16 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 Microsoft.Extensions.ApiDescriptions2 NConsole3 NSwag.Collections4 NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Infrastructure5 NSwag6 NSwag.Commands.Document7 NSwag.Commands.Tooling8 NSwag.CodeGeneration.OperationNameGenerators9 NSwag.Commands.Generation10 NSwag.Commands.Generation.AspNetCore11 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts12 NSwag.CodeGeneration13 NSwag.Generation.Processors14 NSwag.CodeGeneration.Models15 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Collections16 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Security17 NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models18 NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models19 NSwag.Generation20 NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp21 NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript22 NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore23 NSwag.Generation.WebApi24 Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection25 NSwag.AspNet.Owin26 NSwag.AspNetCore27 NSwag.Commands.CodeGeneration28 NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Processors29 NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Processors30 Microsoft.AspNetCore.Builder31 NSwag.AspNet.Owin.Middlewares32 NSwag.AspNetCore.Middlewares33 NSwag.Commands34 NSwagStudio35 NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGenerators36 NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators37 NSwagStudio.ViewModels38 NSwagStudio.ViewModels.SwaggerGenerators39 NSwagStudio.Views40 NSwagStudio.Views.SwaggerGenerators
1 Microsoft.Extensions.ApiDescriptions
2 NConsole
3 NSwag.Collections
4 NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Infrastructure
5 NSwag15
6 NSwag.Commands.Document6
7 NSwag.Commands.Tooling3
8 NSwag.CodeGeneration.OperationNameGenerators16
9 NSwag.Commands.Generation211
10 NSwag.Commands.Generation.AspNetCore411
11 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts43
12 NSwag.CodeGeneration41
13 NSwag.Generation.Processors4111
14 NSwag.CodeGeneration.Models94
15 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Collections1
16 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Security233
17 NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models115410
18 NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models8349
19 NSwag.Generation212
20 NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp655
21 NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript242
22 NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore614
23 NSwag.Generation.WebApi232
24 Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection111
25 NSwag.AspNet.Owin11
26 NSwag.AspNetCore1211
27 NSwag.Commands.CodeGeneration1213144
28 NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Processors2342
29 NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Processors2342
30 Microsoft.AspNetCore.Builder6
31 NSwag.AspNet.Owin.Middlewares12
32 NSwag.AspNetCore.Middlewares13
33 NSwag.Commands541115
34 NSwagStudio1
35 NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGenerators134634
36 NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators84
37 NSwagStudio.ViewModels211
38 NSwagStudio.ViewModels.SwaggerGenerators1122
39 NSwagStudio.Views3
40 NSwagStudio.Views.SwaggerGenerators111532
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 Microsoft.Extensions.ApiDescriptions2 NConsole3 NSwag.Collections4 NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Infrastructure5 NSwag6 NSwag.Commands.Document7 NSwag.Commands.Tooling8 NSwag.CodeGeneration.OperationNameGenerators9 NSwag.Commands.Generation10 NSwag.Commands.Generation.AspNetCore11 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts12 NSwag.CodeGeneration13 NSwag.Generation.Processors14 NSwag.CodeGeneration.Models15 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Collections16 NSwag.Generation.Processors.Security17 NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models18 NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models19 NSwag.Generation20 NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp21 NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript22 NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore23 NSwag.Generation.WebApi24 Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection25 NSwag.AspNet.Owin26 NSwag.AspNetCore27 NSwag.Commands.CodeGeneration28 NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Processors29 NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Processors30 Microsoft.AspNetCore.Builder31 NSwag.AspNet.Owin.Middlewares32 NSwag.AspNetCore.Middlewares33 NSwag.Commands34 NSwagStudio35 NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGenerators36 NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators37 NSwagStudio.ViewModels38 NSwagStudio.ViewModels.SwaggerGenerators39 NSwagStudio.Views40 NSwagStudio.Views.SwaggerGeneratorsMicrosoft.Extensions.ApiDescriptions1NConsole2NSwag.Collections3NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Infrastructure4NSwag5NSwag.Commands.Document6NSwag.Commands.Tooling7NSwag.CodeGeneration.OperationNameGenerators8NSwag.Commands.Generation9NSwag.Commands.Generation.AspNetCore10NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts11NSwag.CodeGeneration12NSwag.Generation.Processors13NSwag.CodeGeneration.Models14NSwag.Generation.Processors.Collections15NSwag.Generation.Processors.Security16NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models17NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models18NSwag.Generation19NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp20NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript21NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore22NSwag.Generation.WebApi23Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection24NSwag.AspNet.Owin25NSwag.AspNetCore26NSwag.Commands.CodeGeneration27NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Processors28NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Processors29Microsoft.AspNetCore.Builder30NSwag.AspNet.Owin.Middlewares31NSwag.AspNetCore.Middlewares32NSwag.Commands33NSwagStudio34NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGenerators35NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators36NSwagStudio.ViewModels37NSwagStudio.ViewModels.SwaggerGenerators38NSwagStudio.Views39NSwagStudio.Views.SwaggerGenerators401563162114114341411194123311541083492126552426142321111112111213144234223426121354111511346348421111223111532+16 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 57% · Adequate ·

The Good
D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 10.0 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 9.7 D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 10.0 D4 · .NET / C# Code Duplication 9.8 D18 · .NET / C# Solution Shape 10.0 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 7.6 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X32 · Repo Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 10.0
The Bad
D17 · .NET / C# Explicit Debt 6.4 X1 · Repo Async correctness 5.3 X3 · Repo Exception handling 5.1 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 5.0
The Ugly
X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 4.3 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 2.7 X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 4.8 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 4.8

At a glance — Architecture · 99% · Exemplary ·

The Good
D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 9.5 D6 · .NET / C# Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · .NET / C# Project Cohesion 10.0 D27 · .NET / C# Navigability 8.8 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX1 · Repo Captive dependencies 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.8 AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0

At a glance — Maturity · 68% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good
D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · .NET / C# Documentation Quality 8.0 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 9.0 D24 · .NET / C# Comment Value 7.5 D34 · .NET / C# Knowledge Freshness 9.3 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 9.6
The Bad
M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 6.7
The Ugly
D20 · .NET / C# ADR Quality 0.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 3.0

At a glance — Readiness · 49% · Weak · gated by P7 ·

The Good
D9 · .NET / C# Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · .NET / C# Test Quality 9.5 D11 · .NET / C# Test Reliability 10.0 D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0
The Bad
D13 · .NET / C# Secret Scanning 5.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 6.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0
The Ugly
P2 · Repo Observability 4.2 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 4.0 P7 · Repo Outbound HTTP resilience 3.0

At a glance — Security · 41% · Weak · gated by D29, D36, C1 ·

The Good
D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 9.0 D30 · .NET / C# Dependency Vulnerabilities 9.4 D43 · .NET / C# Malicious Dependencies 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0
The Bad
D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 6.0
The Ugly
D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 1.6 D36 · .NET / C# Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 0.0 C1 · Repo Data Protection 3.0 S1 · Repo Cryptographic Hygiene 4.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 4.0

At a glance — Accessibility · 52% · Adequate · gated by AC3 ·

The Good
AC1 · Repo Text alternatives 10.0
The Ugly
AC3 · Repo Page structure 3.5 AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

At a glance — Performance · 60% · Adequate ·

The Bad
PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 6.0

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 categoryFindingsSeverity
A05:2025 — Injection53High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures8High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures2High / Critical

Roadmap

Immediately secure sensitive data by implementing encryption at rest and managing keys in a vault, while simultaneously fixing TLS validation to reject untrusted certificates. Address platform stability by updating the end-of-life runtime and hardening the supply chain by restricting workflow token permissions. Finally, remove any leaked secrets from the repository to complete the security remediation.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life — start with NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj.+3.0 ptsLowPlatform End-of-Life
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).+5.7 ptsMediumData Protection
Stop accepting every TLS certificate: remove the always-true validation callback so the platform verifies the chain, hostname and expiry. If one self-signed certificate must be trusted, pin it by public key or thumbprint on the single handler that needs it and reject all others — never process-wide.+5.4 ptsMediumCryptographic Hygiene
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED.+2.2 ptsLowSupply-chain Provenance & Signing
Resolve the 1 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED.+2.1 ptsLowSecret Scanning
Resolve the 1 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED.+1.5 ptsLowSecrets (history)
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED.+1.5 ptsLowStatic Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED.+1.5 ptsLowStatic Analysis (SAST)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 59 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 3% slop · 55% mixed · 42% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED2.3SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED2.3SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.0MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED4.0MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED4.0MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj4.3MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
REDACTED4.4MixedSecret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs5.0MixedExplicit Debt: FileScopedPragmaDisable
src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj5.5MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.Generation.Tests/NSwag.Generation.Tests.csproj5.8MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs6.0MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
build/_build.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwagStudio/NSwagStudio.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.VersionMissmatchTest/NSwag.VersionMissmatchTest.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.Sample.NET100Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET100Minimal.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.Core.Tests/NSwag.Core.Tests.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.csproj6.4MixedExplicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj

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 — 68

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 — 150

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 — 80

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

Could not be resolved — 8

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. 76 of 80 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — 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 — 80 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D10D11D13D14D15D17D18D19D20D21D24D26D27D28D29D30D34D35D36D43D44AC1AC3AC7AX1AX10AX2AX3AX4AX5AX6AX8C1GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6P7PF3S1X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X32X4X5

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
  1. 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, 277 of 298 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.)
  2. 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.
  3. 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.

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivySecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a16893-238e-74e1-bb6c-6b45736bf19d.

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.

  • 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. `dotnet list package` did not return usable output (restore or query failed); no outdated/vulnerable/deprecated data to assess. The tool said: `dotnet list package` exited 1 with no output.
  • D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (329 contributor(s) across 4312 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 83% of the history; the other 328 hold 0.1% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
  • D17 Explicit Debt — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The C# workspace loaded this repository's projects but reported a load failure, and the dead-code reference search is unreliable over a graph that did not load cleanly, so it was skipped. The other debt markers on this row were read; dead symbols were not, and their absence from the score is not a finding that the code has none. First load diagnostic: Failure: Cannot open project 'src/NSwagStudio.Installer/NSwagStudio.Installer.wixproj' because the file extension '.wixproj' is not associated with a language.
  • D18 Solution Shape — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. `dotnet build` reported 1 error(s), and the diagnostics it printed were: MSB6006: "wix.exe" exited with code 1.. None of them is a .NET compiler diagnostic, which is the only signal this check reads as "the code does not compile", so the failure is recorded as a build-environment gap rather than a code defect. The usual causes are a project that targets a platform this run cannot build (a Windows-only target framework on a Linux worker) or a build step that shells out to a tool the image does not carry. Solution Shape is scored on structure and is NOT capped. Semantic analysis is independent of this build and covers every project that loaded — but a project whose restore did not complete has no resolved references, so treat its results as absent rather than clean. ★ The reach of that test, stated so this classification can be checked rather than taken on trust: it reads the C# (CS), Visual Basic (BC) and F# (FS) compiler series, and treats SDK, NuGet-restore and MSBuild codes (NETSDK, NU, MSB) as evidence that the build did not run rather than that the code is broken — read the diagnostics named above and judge for yourself. You can widen what we reach: if this build is meant to run off its own platform, without host tooling we do not carry, the diagnostics named above are what stopped it. If it is deliberately platform-bound — a Windows-only desktop product, say — there is nothing to do here: the note records our reach, not a defect in your build.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — 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. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — 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. Large codebase (21,798 production LoC in the .NET projects) with no declared bounded contexts — cross-boundary type coupling is unassessed Bounded contexts cannot be inferred from a codebase that is not physically organised by them (D-321), so with none declared there are no boundaries for the coupling pass to measure across. You can widen what we reach: name this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2 module groups, e.g. per subsystem) so cross-boundary type coupling can 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"]`.
  • D28 Secrets (history) — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. D28's config-credential rule (WD-SECRET-0002) parses each committed `.json` config as a document and reads credential-named values; `src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/nswag.json`, `src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/nswag.json`, `src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/nswag.json` did not parse (JSON5, a template, several concatenated documents), so a credential bound there is UNMEASURED by that rule. gitleaks still scanned the same files as text.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui-es-bundle-core.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Extensions/NSwagServiceCollectionExtensions.cs`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/HttpRequestExtension.cs`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/OAuth2ClientSettings.cs`, … (+7 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. IL NOT MEASURED: the analyzer's own build of this repository failed for an ENVIRONMENT reason (exit 1) — MSBuild's engine or the CLR gave up, or our image does not carry the SDK band/targeting pack this repository needs. This is OUR limitation, not a defect in the repo, and it is not a statement that this repository fails to build. D18 owns the question of whether this repository builds; it was not answered here.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — 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. Visual & motion safety could not be assessed in this run — the check did not complete, so it is not scored. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository. Engine failure: ArgumentOutOfRangeException: startIndex cannot be larger than length of string. (Parameter 'startIndex').
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — 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. User interface: 13 markup document(s) — HTML, Razor, JSX, Vue, Svelte or server templates. Boot: the service booted and answers HTTP at http://127.0.0.1:38551, but serves no HTML page — nothing for the accessibility crawl.
  • 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.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 16 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 56.

Repo exclusion declarations: 3 pattern(s) declared (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code) excluded 0 source file(s) from code-quality scoring. Declarations are the repo's own visible statement that a tree is machine-written or vendored — auditable in any diff, honored by GitHub the same way.

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
  • D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • 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.
  • D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
  • 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.
  • D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
  • 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.
  • D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
  • AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D24, 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 Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity9.7 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was Build.Publish.get at 18.

Build.Publish.get (cognitive 18)build/Build.Publish.cs:31

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with Build.Publish.get (cognitive 18). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 9.7 to about 10.0/10.
  2. 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.

D3 · God Classes10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 god class(es) detected.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md.

D4 · Code Duplication9.8 / 10Stronggated by 9 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 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

9 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (23 lines × 2)src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:36
Duplicated block (20 lines × 2)src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:22
Duplicated block (17–18 lines × 3)src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:35
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2)src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:107
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2)src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:90

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Startup.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (17–18 lines × 3) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Startup.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. 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.

D5 · Coupling9.5 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ 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 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

Off the main sequence: NSwag.Annotations(net462) · ×4src/NSwag.Annotations/NSwag.Annotations.csproj:1

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling — start with NSwag.Annotations.csproj, NSwag.Core.csproj, NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  2. 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.

Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.

Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.

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

0 of 4 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

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

394 test methods: 394 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality9.5 / 10Adequategated by 2 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.

Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 skipped, 0 zero-assertion, 4 excluded from compilation in 2 file(s), 3 depending on a live external host, 1 skipped with a live token-identical twin, 169 auto-approving their snapshot in 2 place(s), 1 mock references across 393 tests.

Tests excluded from compilation: src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/OperationProcessors/OpenApiQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs · ×2src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/OperationProcessors/OpenApiQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs:46
Skipped test: When_setting_is_enabled_properties_with_required_keyword_should_generate_with_required_keyword · ×4src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/RequiredParameterTests.cs:62
Depends on a live external host: When_Swagger_is_loaded_from_url_then_it_works · ×3src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:7
Snapshot tests auto-approve: src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.Tests/VerifyHelper.cs · ×2src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.Tests/VerifyHelper.cs:44
Mock framework: Moq

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Tests excluded from compilation finding(s) in Test Quality — start with OpenApiQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs, SwaggerQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 Skipped test finding(s) in Test Quality — start with BodyParametersTests.cs (2), RequiredParameterTests.cs, HttpLoadingTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 3 Depends on a live external host finding(s) in Test Quality — start with HttpLoadingTests.cs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d11_recommendation.md.

D13 · Secret Scanning5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Enforce Secret Scanning in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

0 of 167 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 45 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 160 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt6.4 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

55 deducted debt markers + unmeasured dead symbols across 21798 LoC in the .NET projects (1.8/KLoC) → score 6.4. Dead code not measured: the solution did not load cleanly, so the reference search was skipped.

NoWarnInCsproj — 6 warning codes suppressed in one element · ×31src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web.csproj:6
FileScopedPragmaDisablesrc/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:86
DisabledAnalyzerssrc/NSwagStudio/NSwagStudio.csproj:16
TodoComment · ×8src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/FormParameterTests.cs:129
BarePragmaDisable · ×8src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/OptionalParameterTests.cs:32

What to do

  1. Resolve the 31 NoWarnInCsproj finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj (4), NSwag.Generation.Tests.csproj (3), _build.csproj (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (31 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 FileScopedPragmaDisable finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 DisabledAnalyzers finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with NSwagStudio.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  4. 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.

D18 · Solution Shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the solution is laid out in a sensible, conventional structure.

Method: Solution structure: project count, decomposition, shell-project detection, build success (confirmed failures cap the score); traced to actual .sln files and binaries. Deterministic.

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

67 projects, 1044 source files, 33852 hand-written lines of code (21753 production / 12099 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), plus 76 generated (machine-written code — designer, scaffolded and tool-emitted files — excluded from quality), 117 inter-project edges (build NOT measured — `dotnet build` did not complete in the analyzer, so the build half of this dimension is unmeasured rather than failed: the score above rests on structure alone and is not capped. The diagnostics that stopped it are named under Limitations.)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md.

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 gives a strong overview (NSwag toolchain for .NET/ASP.NET Core/WebAPI/TypeScript, features, ways to use it) and links to the project's NuGet, npm, and CI badges plus an announcement of Apimundo. The src/NSwag.Npm/README is a directory README documenting that directory rather than the repository (no install/build steps), while docs/tutorials/GenerateProxyClientWithCLI/generate-proxy-client.md is a detailed tutorial with prerequisites, sample process, and notes about runtime versioning; all are well written for their audiences. The visible content is complete and well-structured.

XML-doc coverage: NSwag.CodeGeneration(netstandard2.0) · ×27src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/NSwag.CodeGeneration.csproj

What to do

  1. Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — The repository's root README gives a strong overview (NSwag toolchain for .NET/ASP.NET Core/WebAPI/TypeScript, features, ways to use it) and links to the project's NuGet, npm, and CI badges plus an announcement of Apimundo. The src/NSwag.Npm/README is a directory README documenting that directory rather than the repository (no install/build steps), while docs/tutorials/GenerateProxyClientWithCLI/generate-proxy-client.md is a detailed tutorial with prerequisites, sample process, and notes about runtime versioning; all are well written for their audiences. The visible content is complete and well-structured.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

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

2 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

The `Person` class used in test fixtures for C# and TypeScript code generation tests is named identically (`Person`), but it is defined in two separate test classes (`NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.CodeGenerationTests` and `NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.CodeGenerationTests`). While this is not a naming inconsistency per se, the duplication of the `Person` type across these distinct test namespaces suggests a lack of shared test fixture abstraction. However, strictly following the rules, these are different concepts (fixtures for different generators) and thus not an inconsistency.
Similar to the `LastName` property, the `Sex` property is duplicated in test fixtures. This is a consistent pattern across the two test suites, not an inconsistency.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D24 · Comment ValueStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on deterministically sampled inline comments with surrounding code; findings verified back to sampled comments by substring match. Advisory, sampled.

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

54 valuable / 0 redundant across 200 sampled comments.

What to do

  1. Improve Comment Value — currently 7.5/10. — 54 valuable / 0 redundant across 200 sampled comments.

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 of 36 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

D27 · Navigability8.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

82 % of calls cross a namespace and 3 % go through an interface, but 90 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

What to do

  1. Improve Navigability — currently 8.8/10. — 82 % of calls cross a namespace and 3 % go through an interface, but 90 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md.

D28 · Secrets (history)9.0 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)1.6 / 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 1.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

53 finding(s): 0 critical, 22 high, 28 medium, 3 low. 20 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 17 file(s) — `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui-es-bundle-core.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui-standalone-preset.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Extensions/NSwagServiceCollectionExtensions.cs` (line 78), `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/HttpRequestExtension.cs` (line 14, lines 14–16), … (+12 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

+ 3 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  3. No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 20 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (20 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities9.4 / 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 and Erlang via Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness9.3 / 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 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 15 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/Program.cs. Counted over 15 of the 66 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
Orphaned filesrc/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/Program.cs:1

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

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.

D44 · Platform End-of-Life6.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 38 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.

End-of-life runtime: .NET net9.0src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj:3

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life — start with NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

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

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

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

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

AC3 · Page structure3.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

  • The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en"). (×2) — REDACTED:2, REDACTED:2
  • No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. This document's body is only the mount point <div id="redoc-container">, so there is no content here to wrap — render the <main> from the component mounted into it. (×2) — REDACTED:2, REDACTED:2

What to do

  • Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

  • No accessibility enforcement found — no automated accessibility check runs over the HTML your app renders. Assert the accessibility invariants over that HTML in the test suite you already have (parse the output and assert, or drive a browser), and gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 13 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

  • Enforce accessibility in the test suite you already have: assert the accessibility invariants over the HTML your app renders — parse the rendered output in an existing test, or drive a real browser from one — and gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.
AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.

Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.

AX10 · Code composition9.8 / 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.

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.
AX2 · Stateful singletons10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.

Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.

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.

  • The namespaces NSwag.Generation ↔ NSwag.Generation.Processors ↔ NSwag.Generation.Processors.Collections ↔ NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.Generation → NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts (NSwag.Generation.OpenApiDocumentGeneratorSettings → NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts.OperationProcessorContext, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/NSwag.Generation/OpenApiDocumentGeneratorSettings.cs:15
  • The namespaces NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp ↔ NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp → NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models (NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.CSharpClientGenerator → NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models.CSharpOperationModel, 5 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/CSharpClientGenerator.cs:11
  • The namespaces NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript ↔ NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript → NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models (NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.TypeScriptClientGenerator → NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models.TypeScriptOperationModel, 2 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/TypeScriptClientGenerator.cs:12
  • The namespaces NSwag.Commands ↔ NSwag.Commands.CodeGeneration ↔ NSwag.Commands.Generation ↔ NSwag.Commands.Generation.AspNetCore depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.Commands → NSwag.Commands.Generation (NSwag.Commands.OpenApiGeneratorCollection → NSwag.Commands.Generation.FromDocumentCommand, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/NSwag.Commands/OpenApiGeneratorCollection.cs:3
  • The namespaces NSwagStudio.ViewModels ↔ NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGenerators ↔ NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwagStudio.ViewModels → NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators (NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGeneratorModel → NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators.CodeGeneratorViewBase, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/CodeGeneratorModel.cs:1

What to do

  • Break namespace cycles inside a project by moving the shared type to a namespace both sides can use, or by inverting the back edge behind an interface.
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.

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

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

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

AX6 · Interface segregation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.

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.

C1 · Data Protection3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether sensitive data is encrypted at rest and in transit and keys are vaulted.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: encryption presence (EF ColumnEncryption, key-vault references, HTTPS enforcement) and key-derivation KDF detection. Deterministic.

  • No data-protection or encryption usage (ASP.NET Data Protection, AES, column encryption, PBKDF2) was found — sensitive data at rest may be unprotected. If TDE/KMS/vault is delegated to infrastructure, ignore.

What to do

  • Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.

  • A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×2) — src/NSwagStudio/Converters/IsValueToVisibilityConverter.cs:31, src/NSwagStudio/Converters/NumberAdditionConverter.cs:13

What to do

  • Finish or delete NotImplementedException stubs and replace placeholder literals before shipping.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs7.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords: members that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant, async methods that never await, dead `if (false)` / `#if false` branches, and skeleton types most of whose members are holes. A real, objective slice of technical debt.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

  • `LoadAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagDocumentBase.cs:163
  • A test is skipped with reason "TODO" — the behavior it asserts is UNVERIFIED and this skip is likely the only marker of a real bug. It ages invisibly: fix the flakiness or track the bug somewhere that can't be forgotten. — src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:47
  • `DocumentView.xaml` wires an event to `OnGenerate`, whose body is empty — the markup attaches a listener that does nothing. Implement the handler, or remove the attribute that wires it. — src/NSwagStudio/Views/DocumentView.xaml.cs:72
  • `Left == double.NaN` is false for every value, including NaN itself: IEEE 754 leaves NaN unordered with everything, so `==` against `double.NaN` never depends on the other operand. Use `double.IsNaN(…)` — the test that was intended, and the branch this guards is dead. — REDACTED:76
  • A test is skipped ("The C#11 required keyword does not mark schema properties as required") — coverage that looks present but never runs in any gate. If it's an opt-in suite, document how it runs; otherwise re-enable or delete it. — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/RequiredParameterTests.cs:62
  • A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×10) — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/Models/TypeScriptOperationModel.cs:182, src/NSwag.Core/Collections/ObservableDictionary.cs:225, src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiDocument.Serialization.cs:89, …
  • A test is skipped ("Wrong in .Net 7") — coverage that looks present but never runs in any gate. If it's an opt-in suite, document how it runs; otherwise re-enable or delete it. (×2) — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Parameters/BodyParametersTests.cs:49, src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Parameters/BodyParametersTests.cs:102

What to do

  • Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
M1 · Documentation (README)6.7 / 10Adequate✓ 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

  • Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
  • Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
  • Add a README to the 36 of 36 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
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.

M4 · Documentation accuracy9.6 / 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.

  • README.md names Angular 2, but the manifest declares `angular` ^1.8.3. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:17
  • src/NSwag.Npm/README.md names Angular 2, but the manifest declares `angular` ^1.8.3. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — src/NSwag.Npm/README.md:1

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: README.md names Angular 2, but the manifest declares `angular` ^1.8.3; src/NSwag.Npm/README.md names Angular 2, but the manifest declares `angular` ^1.8.3.
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.

P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.

Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

What to do

  • Make types internal by default and expose only the deliberate public API — even for a small library, every public type is a stability contract.
P2 · Observability4.2 / 10Weak✓ 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 1/19 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log). Of those 19, 8 ship a process this repository operates; the rest are libraries their consumer hosts, where the logging decision belongs to the host.

What to do

  • Extend structured logging across the projects you operate, and give the library ones a diagnostics seam instead — an `EventSource`/`ActivitySource` the host can subscribe to, or an optional logger on your options object — rather than taking a logging dependency on your consumers' behalf.
  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics and a health-check endpoint for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

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

  • The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.

What to do

  • Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
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.

P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether outbound HTTP calls are wrapped in resilience (retry/timeout/circuit-breaker) so a failing dependency doesn't cascade.

Method: Source scan: outbound HTTP clients and what bounds them — resilience handlers (Polly, AddStandardResilienceHandler) on .NET; on Go, the JVM, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, PHP, Rust, Elixir, Swift, Dart and Erlang, a timeout, deadline, retry or breaker beside each call, or a process-wide client default (a framework-wide deadline such as Drupal core's, Laravel's or actix's awc counts). Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • Outbound HTTP calls were found with no timeout or retry policy around them. This codebase ships libraries/tools rather than a service it operates, so the failure lands differently: an unbounded call hangs the caller's process — a build step, a CLI run, a UI thread — with no way out.

What to do

  • Give every outbound call a bound the caller can rely on: set an explicit `HttpClient.Timeout` (or pass a `CancellationToken` from a `CancellationTokenSource` with a deadline) and flow the caller's own `CancellationToken` through, so a slow endpoint fails fast instead of hanging.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene6.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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, Swift, Dart) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux or a Scala method returning a Future or effect — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

  • 5 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×5) — src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/AspNetCoreToOpenApiGeneratorCommandEntryPoint.cs:28, src/NSwag.Commands/HostFactoryResolver.cs:265, src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:203, …

What to do

  • Make the call chain async end-to-end and await it — never block on a Task with .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult().
S1 · Cryptographic Hygiene4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Cryptographic hygiene (weak hash/cipher, password key-derivation). This codebase has no web surface, so transport/header/cookie/CSRF controls are N/A and only crypto is scored. Outbound TLS (certificate validation, protocol version) is scored wherever it appears — a client verifies its peer whether or not it serves anything itself. Markup this repository SHIPS is scored for third-party script integrity whether or not the repository serves it itself — a page handed to a consumer runs in that consumer's origin.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.

  • `ServerCertificateValidationCallback` is assigned a callback that returns `true` unconditionally, so every TLS peer certificate is accepted — including one an attacker presents. Chain, expiry, revocation and hostname are all skipped, so an attacker on the network path can present any certificate and read or rewrite the traffic — the connection is encrypted to the attacker, not to the intended host. Delete the override and let the platform validate. If a specific self-signed or internally-issued certificate genuinely has to be trusted, pin THAT one — compare the presented certificate's public key or thumbprint against the expected value and return `false` for everything else — and scope it to the single handler that talks to that host rather than to the whole process. If the override exists only to get past a development certificate, gate it on a build configuration or an explicit opt-in setting so it cannot ship. — REDACTED:30
  • `https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/redoc/bundles/redoc.standalone.js` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. The URL also names no version, so it resolves to whatever that origin serves at fetch time — the executed bytes can change with nobody touching this repository. 2 such include(s) across the repository's markup. — REDACTED:18

What to do

  • Stop accepting every TLS certificate: remove the always-true validation callback so the platform verifies the chain, hostname and expiry. If one self-signed certificate must be trusted, pin it by public key or thumbprint on the single handler that needs it and reject all others — never process-wide.
  • Pin third-party scripts and verify them: name an exact version in the URL and add an `integrity="sha384-…"` hash alongside `crossorigin="anonymous"` (both are required — an integrity hash on a cross-origin script without `crossorigin` is not evaluated, it blocks the script). Where the vendor ships a continuously-updated loader and publishes no stable hash (tag managers, analytics, chat widgets), Subresource Integrity is not available: constrain it instead with a `Content-Security-Policy` that names the exact origins allowed to execute, and drop the script from the pages that do not need it. Where the page is shipped inside a package that others host, prefer vendoring the asset and serving it from the app’s own origin, so no consumer inherits a third-party dependency they did not choose.
X1 · Async correctness5.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.

  • `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained. (×3) — src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:83, REDACTED:58, REDACTED:80
  • `StreamReader.ReadToEnd` blocks the thread on I/O while `StreamReader.ReadToEndAsync` exists to wait without one — inside a method that is already `async`, await the twin. — src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/SwaggerUiIndexMiddleware.cs:29
  • Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process. (×4) — src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/AspNetCoreToOpenApiGeneratorCommandEntryPoint.cs:28, src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:203, src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:214, …
  • `.Wait(…)` blocks this thread until the task completes or the bound expires — sync-over-async: it can deadlock under a synchronization context and it parks a thread while it waits. `await` the task (with `.WaitAsync(timeout, token)` where the bound matters). — src/NSwag.Commands/HostFactoryResolver.cs:253

What to do

  • async void method: OnLoaded
X12 · Unreachable branch10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X13 · Undrained process stream4.3 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • `RedirectStandardError` is set here, but nothing in this type ever reads `StandardError` — while `StandardOutput` is read to the end. The child blocks as soon as it fills the StandardError pipe (~4 KB, never more than 64 KB), and it can then never finish writing StandardOutput, so the read-to-end above never returns and the `WaitForExit` timeout beside it does not help: the timeout bounds the WAIT, not the read that precedes it. Drain both — read one stream on a background thread (`BeginErrorReadLine()` with an `ErrorDataReceived` handler, or a `Task` running the second `ReadToEndAsync()`) and await both before `WaitForExit()` — or stop redirecting the stream you do not consume. — src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/ProjectMetadata.cs:238

What to do

  • Each finding names the span that makes the branch dead and the span it is dead because of. Confirm from the two, then delete the dead arm or fix the predicate that was meant to be reachable.
X14 · Bypassable address classification10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X16 · Unfloored truncation loop10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a walk that recurses through a JSON/XML tree handed in by its caller bounds how deep it will go — an uncapped walk lets the document's nesting choose the stack depth, and the resulting StackOverflowException cannot be caught.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that take a JSON/XML document node and call themselves with a child of it, reachable from an externally-callable member of the same type that accepts a document, checked for any depth parameter, descent counter or threaded arithmetic anywhere in the walk. On a repository with no .NET source it reads TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths and `.d.ts` not) with the same rule: a function or method with a parameter typed as a document value — `unknown`, `any`, `object`, `Record<string, unknown|any>`, a JSON alias (`JsonValue`, `JSONObject`, …) or a DOM node global the file does not rebind — that calls itself (bare, or through `this` for a method, or hands itself to a call over the value as in `value.map(walk)`) with something it took out of that value and never through an ancestor accessor such as `closest()` or `parentElement`, that is exported or reached from an exported function (a public method of the same exported class) taking such a value, and that names no depth, level, nesting, recursion, remaining or budget anywhere and threads no `+`/`-` arithmetic through a self-call. Plain JavaScript is not read: with no annotation nothing tells a parsed document from a tree the code built itself. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness2.7 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • `dlg` is a `OpenFileDialog`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 135). Every use of it in `OpenDocumentAsync` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var dlg = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:135
  • `dlg` is a `SaveFileDialog`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 246). Every use of it in `SaveAsDocumentAsync` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var dlg = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:246

What to do

  • Each finding names the value and the span that decides who owns it — the `new` that created it, or the constructor parameter that handed it over. Confirm ownership from that span, then make the disposal match it: release what this type created, leave what it was injected with to whoever created THAT, and drop a finalizer whose type holds nothing unmanaged to release.
X19 · Unrestored process-global state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X2 · Cancellation propagation4.8 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether async methods accept a CancellationToken so work can be cancelled (adoption curve).

Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same question: every named async function that itself makes a request an AbortSignal can cancel (global `fetch`, axios and its file-local instances, ky, ofetch) counts, and it is compliant when its parameters or body name a signal or it hands one of its own parameters to the request as options; signatures a framework fixes (JSX event handlers, route and lifecycle exports, request-first handlers, `override`, `'use server'` modules, TanStack `mutationFn`) are exempt unless they take a signal. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

  • Only 8/62 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×38) — src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/CodeGenerators/SwaggerOutputViewModel.cs:17, src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/DocumentViewModel.cs:45, src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:89, …
  • No CancellationToken parameter, and the token `context.Request.CallCancelled` carries reaches none of the calls here that take one — this work can't be stopped early once started. Pass `context.Request.CallCancelled` on, or take a CancellationToken. — src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs:91

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X20 · Mistyped argument guard4.8 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `ArgumentNullException` tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(p))` statements controlled by an `if`, whose condition is read for a test that is true of a NON-null `p` — an emptiness test that dereferences it (`p.Count == 0`, `!p.Any()`) or a BCL predicate documented true of the empty value (`string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)`). Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • The guard on line 195 rejects `name` and line 197 reports that rejection as `ArgumentNullException` — but the condition's own test `string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(name)` is true of a value that is NOT null: it is satisfied by an EMPTY `name`, and on that path `name` was already proven non-null by the very expression that decided it (`||` short-circuits, so the null test to its left had to be false to get here). So a caller who passes a valid empty argument is told a parameter was null. That is not a wording problem: the exception type is the contract. A caller catching `ArgumentNullException` to handle a real null swallows the empty case with it, and whoever reads the stack trace later is told a failure the source disproves. .NET separates the two on purpose — `ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull` and `ArgumentException.ThrowIfNullOrEmpty` are two helpers because they are two failures. Throw `ArgumentException` for the empty case, or split the guard and throw each on its own condition. — src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettings.cs:197
  • The guard on line 200 rejects `url` and line 202 reports that rejection as `ArgumentNullException` — but the condition's own test `string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(url)` is true of a value that is NOT null: it is satisfied by an EMPTY `url`, and on that path `url` was already proven non-null by the very expression that decided it (`||` short-circuits, so the null test to its left had to be false to get here). So a caller who passes a valid empty argument is told a parameter was null. That is not a wording problem: the exception type is the contract. A caller catching `ArgumentNullException` to handle a real null swallows the empty case with it, and whoever reads the stack trace later is told a failure the source disproves. .NET separates the two on purpose — `ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull` and `ArgumentException.ThrowIfNullOrEmpty` are two helpers because they are two failures. Throw `ArgumentException` for the empty case, or split the guard and throw each on its own condition. — src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettings.cs:202

What to do

  • Each finding names the throw and the test in its own condition that is true of a NON-null value. Confirm from the two, then throw the exception that describes what was actually wrong: `ArgumentException` for a value that arrived empty, or the .NET 8 helpers that spell the whole guard in one line and pick the type for you — `ArgumentException.ThrowIfNullOrEmpty(s)` / `ThrowIfNullOrWhiteSpace(s)` for strings, `ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(x)` followed by `ArgumentOutOfRangeException.ThrowIfZero(x.Count)` for a collection. Splitting the two conditions is usually clearer than picking one exception for both: they are different failures and the caller may want to handle them differently.
X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X22 · Contradicted release guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.

Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.

Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • `uriString` is text this program did not author, and it is written into the start of a URL attribute, where it chooses the scheme through a `StringBuilder` building markup with nothing encoding it for that place. Whoever controls the value controls the markup: it can close the element or attribute it sits in and open a script of its own. HTML encoding does not help here — a `javascript:` URL contains nothing it changes; allow only http(s) or a relative path. — src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettingsBase.cs:85
  • `uriString` is text this program did not author, and it is written into the start of a URL attribute, where it chooses the scheme through markup this method returns with nothing encoding it for that place. Whoever controls the value controls the markup: it can close the element or attribute it sits in and open a script of its own. HTML encoding does not help here — a `javascript:` URL contains nothing it changes; allow only http(s) or a relative path. — src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettingsBase.cs:116

What to do

  • Each finding names the expression, the attribute it lands in and the line. Confirm the value's origin from the read this analyzer traced, then escape it at the sink or validate it against the shape the attribute accepts before interpolating.
X25 · Inert configuration knob10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.

Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X26 · Unsynchronised callback handoff10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.

Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `foreach` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is enumerating invalidates the enumerator it is holding, so the next `MoveNext` throws `InvalidOperationException` and the remaining items are never seen.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X3 · Exception handling5.1 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.

  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×3) — src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/AspNetCoreToOpenApiCommand.cs:257, src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/ProjectMetadata.cs:268, src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs:165
  • `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch. — src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/Program.cs:150

What to do

  • Swallowed exception (empty catch)
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a plugin lookup names the type it means — searching every assembly loaded into the process for a candidate whose SIMPLE name equals a string supplied at runtime, and taking the first one found, is decided by assembly LOAD ORDER rather than by this source, so the same name can resolve to a different type on the next run.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every invocation of `First`/`FirstOrDefault`/`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` whose OWN expression subtree contains both a `GetAssemblies()` call and a `GetTypes()`/`GetExportedTypes()` call — a single-element pick out of every type loaded into the process. A nested selector in the same chain sees no `GetAssemblies()` in its own subtree and is outside the population, so one lookup counts once however many links its chain has. A finding additionally needs both remaining halves: the selector must be `First`/`FirstOrDefault` (`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` reports the ambiguity rather than resolving it, and is counted and never reported), and the chain must carry an `==` comparison of `<lambda parameter>.Name` against something that is not a literal. The receiver must be a plain identifier bound by one of the chain’s own lambdas, which places `assembly.GetName().Name == "X"` outside the rule by construction. One exemption: a `.Name` test joined by `&&` to a `FullName`/`AssemblyQualifiedName` test on the same identifier is spared; joined by `||` it is not. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X4 · Structured logging10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.

X5 · Nullable reference types5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.

Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.

  • This method contradicts itself about `returnParameter`: line 280 writes `returnParameter?.`, which says `returnParameter` can be null, but line 262 then dereferences it directly as `returnParameter.ParameterType` with no null test between them and no guard around it. If the `?.` is right, that dereference throws NullReferenceException on the input it was written for; if `returnParameter` truly cannot be null here, the `?.` is misleading. Settle it one way — test `returnParameter` once before the first use and handle the null case, or drop the `?.` — rather than leaving the two readings side by side. — src/NSwag.Generation/Processors/OperationResponseProcessorBase.cs:262
  • 3/8 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.

What to do

  • Where a method uses `?.` on a symbol and then dereferences it directly, settle the question once: test it before the first use and handle null, or drop the `?.`.
  • Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 9 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (16%; ≈18% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 46 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

DimensionWCAG 2.2 A/AA criteriaCoverage
AC1 · Text alternatives1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC7 · A11y enforcementenforcement — no page criterionEnforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 46 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.3, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.7, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

Reference — by lens

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

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health57%AdequateAcceptable, with room to improve.
Architecture99%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Maturity68%Adequate — gated by M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness49%Weak — gated by P7Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security41%Weak — gated by D29, D36, C1Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility52%Adequate — gated by AC3Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance60%AdequateAcceptable, with room to improve.
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.

  • X10 Duplicated predicate — 20 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C3 Audit Trail — Repo shows no audit-logging mechanism (IAuditable, an immutable audit log, an EF SaveChanges interceptor) for sensitive changes — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Record an audit trail in code (or document where it lives) so this dimension can be scored.
  • C4 Data Retention — Repo shows no data-retention / TTL / cleanup mechanism for personal data — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Define retention periods and a purge/cleanup job (or TTL) in code, or document where retention is enforced, so this dimension can be scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Repo shows no corroborated data-subject-rights mechanism (erasure / export-portability / consent) tied to a subject id or GDPR vocabulary — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Implement erasure, data export/portability and consent tracking over the subject's records.
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 37 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.

  • AC2 Forms & labels — No form control/button found in the parsed markup — AC2 not applicable here.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No ARIA usage found in the parsed markup — AC5 not applicable here.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — Visual & motion safety could not be assessed in this run — the check did not complete, so it is not scored. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — The runtime tier booted this repository's service, but the service booted and answers HTTP at http://127.0.0.1:38551, but serves no HTML page — nothing for the accessibility crawl. This repository also has a user interface (13 markup document(s) — HTML, Razor, JSX, Vue, Svelte or server templates) that the booted service does not serve, and this scan has no strategy that reaches it — so no WCAG success criterion was verified in a rendered page on this run. That is a gap in OUR tooling, not a finding about your application: nothing here says the interface is inaccessible. The static accessibility checks still ran.
  • AXS1 Runtime exposed surface — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — no web/app surface to authorize (no HTTP API or web-UI project) and no authorization code at all (no [Authorize]/policies, no imperative guard methods). Access control is therefore N/A here — this is a library/CLI, which is authorized by its CALLER, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency hygiene not measured
  • D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — Cross-context type coupling could not be assessed — this codebase's bounded contexts are neither declared nor inferable.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • 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) — 12 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
  • 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 — IL not measured — the analyzer's build of the target did not succeed
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • 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.
  • P8 Schema migrations — no EF Core usage detected
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Cobertura — `dotnet test --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` with a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 68 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · NoWarnInCsproj · ×31
  • NoWarnInCsproj — 6 warning codes suppressed in one element src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web.csproj:6 — A single <NoWarn> suppresses 6 warning codes (618;1591;CS8603;CS8618;CS8625;CA1861) in one stroke — one team-wide decision, not 6 independent debts. Review the set centrally rather than code-by-code; each code you can re-enable is one less blanket suppression. (Every code still counts toward the score and metrics.)
  • NoWarnInCsproj build/_build.csproj:7 — CS0649 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj build/_build.csproj:7 — CS0169 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwagStudio/NSwagStudio.csproj:15 — CS0618 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests.csproj:4 — CS0618 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.VersionMissmatchTest/NSwag.VersionMissmatchTest.csproj:9 — NU1605 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, including builds years from now. It is raised by the build itself — the packaging, restore or SDK step — about the project as a whole, not by the compiler or an analyzer at a line of code, so there is no call site to narrow it to and no per-site directive that could carry a reason: this element is the only place the decision can be recorded. Say WHY here, in a comment on the entry, or fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.VersionMissmatchTest/NSwag.VersionMissmatchTest.csproj:9 — MSB3277 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, including builds years from now. It is raised by the build itself — the packaging, restore or SDK step — about the project as a whole, not by the compiler or an analyzer at a line of code, so there is no call site to narrow it to and no per-site directive that could carry a reason: this element is the only place the decision can be recorded. Say WHY here, in a comment on the entry, or fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj:4 — CA1050 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal.csproj:4 — CA1050 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Sample.NET100Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET100Minimal.csproj:4 — CA1050 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj:4 — ASP0014 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal.csproj:4 — ASP0014 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Sample.NET100Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET100Minimal.csproj:4 — ASP0014 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests.csproj:4 — CS1591 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.Tests/NSwag.Generation.Tests.csproj:7 — 1591 — this project generates an XML documentation file as a build output, so its documentation is something it PUBLISHES to whoever consumes the assembly, and this entry switches off a rule whose only job is to report that documentation missing or malformed. The two decisions sit in the same file and the quiet one wins: the documentation this project ships has holes exactly where the rule would have pointed, no build says so, and the people who meet the gap are downstream — in their editor, at the moment they are trying to use the member. Write the documentation the rule is asking for and drop the code from the list; where only some elements genuinely cannot carry it, narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rest of the API stays covered. If the documentation was never meant to be consumed, the honest fix is the other line — stop generating the file, so the project no longer publishes something it is choosing not to check.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj:4 — 1591 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.Tests/NSwag.Generation.Tests.csproj:7 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj:4 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Core.Yaml.Tests/NSwag.Core.Yaml.Tests.csproj:6 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Core.Tests/NSwag.Core.Tests.csproj:7 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.ConsoleCore.Tests/NSwag.ConsoleCore.Tests.csproj:4 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.csproj:5 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.Tests/NSwag.CodeGeneration.Tests.csproj:4 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.csproj:5 — CA1707 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj src/NSwag.Generation.Tests/NSwag.Generation.Tests.csproj:7 — CA1822 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • + 6 more in this group — see findings.md.
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
AX3 · Project dependency cycles · Namespace dependency cycle · ×5
  • Namespace dependency cycle src/NSwag.Generation/OpenApiDocumentGeneratorSettings.cs:15 — The namespaces NSwag.Generation ↔ NSwag.Generation.Processors ↔ NSwag.Generation.Processors.Collections ↔ NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.Generation → NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts (NSwag.Generation.OpenApiDocumentGeneratorSettings → NSwag.Generation.Processors.Contexts.OperationProcessorContext, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
  • Namespace dependency cycle src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/CSharpClientGenerator.cs:11 — The namespaces NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp ↔ NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp → NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models (NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.CSharpClientGenerator → NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Models.CSharpOperationModel, 5 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
  • Namespace dependency cycle src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/TypeScriptClientGenerator.cs:12 — The namespaces NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript ↔ NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript → NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models (NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.TypeScriptClientGenerator → NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Models.TypeScriptOperationModel, 2 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
  • Namespace dependency cycle src/NSwag.Commands/OpenApiGeneratorCollection.cs:3 — The namespaces NSwag.Commands ↔ NSwag.Commands.CodeGeneration ↔ NSwag.Commands.Generation ↔ NSwag.Commands.Generation.AspNetCore depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwag.Commands → NSwag.Commands.Generation (NSwag.Commands.OpenApiGeneratorCollection → NSwag.Commands.Generation.FromDocumentCommand, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
  • Namespace dependency cycle src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/CodeGeneratorModel.cs:1 — The namespaces NSwagStudio.ViewModels ↔ NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGenerators ↔ NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is NSwagStudio.ViewModels → NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators (NSwagStudio.ViewModels.CodeGeneratorModel → NSwagStudio.Views.CodeGenerators.CodeGeneratorViewBase, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
AC3 · Page structure · <html> without a lang · ×2
  • <html> without a lang REDACTED:2 — The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en").
  • <html> without a lang REDACTED:2 — The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en").
D10 · Test Quality · Tests excluded from compilation · ×2
  • Tests excluded from compilation: src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/OperationProcessors/OpenApiQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/OperationProcessors/OpenApiQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs:46 — 2 test method(s) in this file, but `NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests.csproj` drops it from the build with `<Compile Remove="OperationProcessors\OpenApiQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs" />`. It never compiles, never runs, and never reports as skipped — unlike a `Skip = "..."` attribute, nothing in a green test run says these tests are gone. Restore it to the compilation, or delete the file so the tree stops implying coverage that isn't there.
  • Tests excluded from compilation: src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/OperationProcessors/SwaggerQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests/OperationProcessors/SwaggerQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs:46 — 2 test method(s) in this file, but `NSwag.Generation.WebApi.Tests.csproj` drops it from the build with `<Compile Remove="OperationProcessors\SwaggerQueryParametersOperationParameterProcessorTests.cs" />`. It never compiles, never runs, and never reports as skipped — unlike a `Skip = "..."` attribute, nothing in a green test run says these tests are gone. Restore it to the compilation, or delete the file so the tree stops implying coverage that isn't there.
D13 · Secret Scanning · Leaked secret · ×1
  • REDACTED
D17 · Explicit Debt · FileScopedPragmaDisable · ×1
  • FileScopedPragmaDisable src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:86 — #pragma warning disable 618 — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
D17 · Explicit Debt · DisabledAnalyzers · ×1
  • DisabledAnalyzers src/NSwagStudio/NSwagStudio.csproj:16 — AnalysisLevel — this does not switch a rule off, it stops the analyzers running for the whole project: every rule they ship is silenced at once, including every rule added by a future upgrade, and nothing at the sites they would have reported records that anything was switched off. There is no code here to look up and nothing to weigh, which is what makes it the one suppression that is never revisited. Turn the analyzers back on and deal with what they report — suppressing the handful of rules that are genuinely unwanted, each on its own line with its reason, keeps the rest protecting the project and leaves a record a reader can audit.
D28 · Secrets (history) · High secret · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×1
  • REDACTED
S1 · Cryptographic Hygiene · TLS certificate validation disabled · ×1
  • TLS certificate validation disabled REDACTED:30 — `ServerCertificateValidationCallback` is assigned a callback that returns `true` unconditionally, so every TLS peer certificate is accepted — including one an attacker presents. Chain, expiry, revocation and hostname are all skipped, so an attacker on the network path can present any certificate and read or rewrite the traffic — the connection is encrypted to the attacker, not to the intended host. Delete the override and let the platform validate. If a specific self-signed or internally-issued certificate genuinely has to be trusted, pin THAT one — compare the presented certificate's public key or thumbprint against the expected value and return `false` for everything else — and scope it to the single handler that talks to that host rather than to the whole process. If the override exists only to get past a development certificate, gate it on a build configuration or an explicit opt-in setting so it cannot ship.
Serious — 150 finding(s)
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken · ×39
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateClientAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/CodeGenerators/SwaggerOutputViewModel.cs:17 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/DocumentViewModel.cs:45 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: LoadApplicationSettingsAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:89 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: OpenDocumentAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:133 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: OpenDocumentAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:149 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: CloseAllDocumentsAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:165 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: CloseDocumentAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:173 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SaveDocumentAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:194 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SaveAllDocumentAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:215 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SaveAsDocumentAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:244 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateSwaggerAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/SwaggerGenerators/AspNetCoreToSwaggerGeneratorViewModel.cs:53 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: LoadSwaggerUrlAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/SwaggerGenerators/SwaggerInputViewModel.cs:21 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateSwaggerAsync src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/SwaggerGenerators/SwaggerInputViewModel.cs:39 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateSwaggerAsync src/NSwagStudio/Views/SwaggerGenerators/JsonSchemaInputView.xaml.cs:22 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateDocumentAsync src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs:91 — No CancellationToken parameter, and the token `context.Request.CallCancelled` carries reaches none of the calls here that take one — this work can't be stopped early once started. Pass `context.Request.CallCancelled` on, or take a CancellationToken.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/JsonSchemaToCSharpCommand.cs:261 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/JsonSchemaToOpenApiCommand.cs:18 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/JsonSchemaToOpenApiCommand.cs:23 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/JsonSchemaToTypeScriptCommand.cs:22 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/OpenApiToCSharpClientCommand.cs:255 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/OpenApiToCSharpClientCommand.cs:266 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/OpenApiToCSharpControllerCommand.cs:80 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/OpenApiToCSharpControllerCommand.cs:87 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/OpenApiToTypeScriptClientCommand.cs:409 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RunAsync src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/CodeGeneration/OpenApiToTypeScriptClientCommand.cs:416 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • + 14 more in this group — see findings.md.
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
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×8
  • TodoComment src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/FormParameterTests.cs:129 — // TODO: Implement for JQuery, AngularJS and Angular 2 — 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 src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/ResponseTests.cs:518 — // TODO this seems broken — 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 src/NSwag.ConsoleCore/CoreConsoleHost.cs:5 — // TODO: Fix ConsoleHost so that it also works in .NET Core — 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 src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:46 — // TODO: Reenable test — 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 src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/ComplexQueryParametersController.cs:23 — // TODO: Should be optional — 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 src/NSwagStudio/Controls/TabContent.cs:9 — // TODO: Move to MyToolkit => check license: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/460989/WPF-TabControl-Turning-Off-Tab-Virtualization
  • TodoComment src/NSwagStudio/Views/DocumentView.xaml.cs:74 — // TODO: Remove — 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 src/NSwagStudio/Views/SwaggerGenerators/JsonSchemaInputView.xaml.cs:35 — // TODO: What to do on error? — 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.
D17 · Explicit Debt · BarePragmaDisable · ×8
  • BarePragmaDisable src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/OptionalParameterTests.cs:32 — #pragma warning disable CA1711 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests.Web/Controllers/Parameters/DefaultParametersController.cs:21 — #pragma warning disable CA1711 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable REDACTED:20 — #pragma warning disable CA1711 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable REDACTED:20 — #pragma warning disable CA1711 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable REDACTED:20 — #pragma warning disable CA1711 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/OptionalParameterTests.cs:44 — #pragma warning disable IDE0051 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/AspNetCoreToSwaggerGenerationTests.cs:910 — #pragma warning disable 108, 114 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
  • BarePragmaDisable src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Processors/OperationResponseProcessorTest.cs:151 — #pragma warning disable CA1822 — the disable is closed again below, so its scope is not the problem; what it records is no reason: there is nothing on the directive line, and no ordinary comment attached to it either side. A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited and it outlives the code it was written for. Put the reason on the directive line — what makes this site legitimately different — or fix what the rule is pointing at and delete the pair. A rationale in the member's documentation comment does not clear this row and is not meant to: it explains the member to its callers, and the next person to touch the suppression is not reading it for that.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking · ×6
  • Sync-over-async blocking — 5 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/AspNetCoreToOpenApiGeneratorCommandEntryPoint.cs:28 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking src/NSwag.Commands/HostFactoryResolver.cs:265 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:203 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:214 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagCommandProcessor.cs:32 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
D10 · Test Quality · Skipped test · ×4
  • Skipped test: When_setting_is_enabled_properties_with_required_keyword_should_generate_with_required_keyword src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/RequiredParameterTests.cs:62 — Skipped — The C#11 required keyword does not mark schema properties as required Its body is token-identical to `When_setting_is_enabled_properties_with_required_attribute_should_generate_with_required_keyword` at line 51 of this file, which is NOT skipped and passes on every build — so the reason above is contradicted by this class's own suite, and re-enabling this test would verify exactly what its twin already verifies. Fix whichever is wrong: delete this test as a duplicate, give it the distinct input it was meant to have, or drop the skip.
  • Skipped test: When_primitive_body_parameter_has_default_value_then_it_is_required_before_net7 src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Parameters/BodyParametersTests.cs:49 — Skipped — Wrong in .Net 7
  • Skipped test: When_complex_body_parameter_has_default_value_then_it_is_required_before_net7 src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Parameters/BodyParametersTests.cs:102 — Skipped — Wrong in .Net 7
  • Skipped test: When_OpenApi_is_loaded_from_url_schematype_is_OpenApi3 src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:47 — Skipped — TODO It also fetches `https://api.percipio.com/common/swagger.json` over the network, so re-enabling it makes this suite depend on api.percipio.com being reachable and unchanged — frequently the untold reason a test like this was switched off in the first place.
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×4
  • Off the main sequence: NSwag.Annotations(net462) src/NSwag.Annotations/NSwag.Annotations.csproj:1 — NSwag.Annotations(net462): abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: NSwag.Core(net462) src/NSwag.Core/NSwag.Core.csproj:1 — NSwag.Core(net462): abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 5 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher(net8.0) src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.csproj:1 — NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher(net8.0): abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — an application entry point, so it is concrete by design — the distance is expected; what is worth checking is that other projects depend on it at all, since a host should be a leaf of the graph.
  • Off the main sequence: NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86 src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86.csproj:1 — NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — an application entry point, so it is concrete by design — the distance is expected; what is worth checking is that other projects depend on it at all, since a host should be a leaf of the graph.
X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) · ×4
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/AspNetCoreToOpenApiGeneratorCommandEntryPoint.cs:28 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:203 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/NSwag.Commands/NConsole/CommandLineProcessor.cs:214 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagCommandProcessor.cs:32 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
D10 · Test Quality · Depends on a live external host · ×3
  • Depends on a live external host: When_Swagger_is_loaded_from_url_then_it_works src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:7 — This test fetches `http://petstore.swagger.io/v2/swagger.json` while it runs, so it passes only while petstore.swagger.io is up, reachable from the build machine, and still serving what this test expects — none of which this repository controls. It goes red on an aeroplane, behind a corporate proxy, in a sealed CI network, and on the day the third party edits that document. Serve the payload from the repository instead (a checked-in fixture file), or stub the transport; if the point really is to check the remote contract, move it out of the unit suite into a separately-scheduled integration job that is allowed to fail for someone else's reasons.
  • Depends on a live external host: When_Swagger_is_loaded_from_url_schematype_is_Swagger2 src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:20 — This test fetches `http://petstore.swagger.io/v2/swagger.json` while it runs, so it passes only while petstore.swagger.io is up, reachable from the build machine, and still serving what this test expects — none of which this repository controls. It goes red on an aeroplane, behind a corporate proxy, in a sealed CI network, and on the day the third party edits that document. Serve the payload from the repository instead (a checked-in fixture file), or stub the transport; if the point really is to check the remote contract, move it out of the unit suite into a separately-scheduled integration job that is allowed to fail for someone else's reasons.
  • Depends on a live external host: When_openapi_is_loaded_without_scopes_it_should_deserialize src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:33 — This test fetches `https://raw.githubusercontent.com/microsoft/commercial-marketplace-openapi/main/Microsoft.Marketplace.SaaS/2018-08-31/saasapi.v2.json` while it runs, so it passes only while raw.githubusercontent.com is up, reachable from the build machine, and still serving what this test expects — none of which this repository controls. It goes red on an aeroplane, behind a corporate proxy, in a sealed CI network, and on the day the third party edits that document. Serve the payload from the repository instead (a checked-in fixture file), or stub the transport; if the point really is to check the remote contract, move it out of the unit suite into a separately-scheduled integration job that is allowed to fail for someone else's reasons.
X1 · Async correctness · async void method · ×3
  • async void method: OnLoaded src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:83 — `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
  • async void method: CheckForApplicationUpdate REDACTED:58 — `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
  • async void method: OnClosing REDACTED:80 — `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×3
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/AspNetCoreToOpenApiCommand.cs:257 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/ProjectMetadata.cs:268 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs:165 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×2
  • Page without a main landmark REDACTED:2 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. This document's body is only the mount point <div id="redoc-container">, so there is no content here to wrap — render the <main> from the component mounted into it.
  • Page without a main landmark REDACTED:2 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. This document's body is only the mount point <div id="redoc-container">, so there is no content here to wrap — render the <main> from the component mounted into it.
D10 · Test Quality · Snapshot tests auto-approve · ×2
  • Snapshot tests auto-approve: src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.Tests/VerifyHelper.cs src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.Tests/VerifyHelper.cs:44 — `AutoVerify(includeBuildServer: false)` configures this snapshot/approval harness to ACCEPT whatever the code under test just produced instead of comparing it to the checked-in baseline, and 168 live test method(s) verify through it (for example `TestNoGuardForOptionalBodyParameter` in AllowNullableBodyParametersTests.cs). Those tests cannot fail on a changed snapshot: the run overwrites the approved file and goes green, so a regression is silently accepted rather than reported, and the rewritten baseline is what gets committed — which is why exempting the build server does not save it either, the local run has already destroyed the evidence CI would have compared against. Auto-accept belongs behind an explicit opt-in a developer turns on to re-bless a deliberate change (a flag, an environment variable), never in the path the suite takes by default.
  • Snapshot tests auto-approve: src/NSwag.ConsoleCore.Tests/GenerateSampleSpecificationTests.cs src/NSwag.ConsoleCore.Tests/GenerateSampleSpecificationTests.cs:79 — `AutoVerify(includeBuildServer: false)` configures this snapshot/approval harness to ACCEPT whatever the code under test just produced instead of comparing it to the checked-in baseline, and 1 live test method(s) verify through it (for example `Should_generate_openapi_for_project` in GenerateSampleSpecificationTests.cs). Those tests cannot fail on a changed snapshot: the run overwrites the approved file and goes green, so a regression is silently accepted rather than reported, and the rewritten baseline is what gets committed — which is why exempting the build server does not save it either, the local run has already destroyed the evidence CI would have compared against. Auto-accept belongs behind an explicit opt-in a developer turns on to re-bless a deliberate change (a flag, an environment variable), never in the path the suite takes by default.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code · Unfinished stub · ×2
  • Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException src/NSwagStudio/Converters/IsValueToVisibilityConverter.cs:31 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
  • Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException src/NSwagStudio/Converters/NumberAdditionConverter.cs:13 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it · ×2
  • Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:135 — `dlg` is a `OpenFileDialog`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 135). Every use of it in `OpenDocumentAsync` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var dlg = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.
  • Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it src/NSwagStudio/ViewModels/MainWindowModel.cs:246 — `dlg` is a `SaveFileDialog`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 246). Every use of it in `SaveAsDocumentAsync` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var dlg = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.
X20 · Mistyped argument guard · Argument guard throws the exception its own condition disproves · ×2
  • Argument guard throws the exception its own condition disproves src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettings.cs:197 — The guard on line 195 rejects `name` and line 197 reports that rejection as `ArgumentNullException` — but the condition's own test `string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(name)` is true of a value that is NOT null: it is satisfied by an EMPTY `name`, and on that path `name` was already proven non-null by the very expression that decided it (`||` short-circuits, so the null test to its left had to be false to get here). So a caller who passes a valid empty argument is told a parameter was null. That is not a wording problem: the exception type is the contract. A caller catching `ArgumentNullException` to handle a real null swallows the empty case with it, and whoever reads the stack trace later is told a failure the source disproves. .NET separates the two on purpose — `ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull` and `ArgumentException.ThrowIfNullOrEmpty` are two helpers because they are two failures. Throw `ArgumentException` for the empty case, or split the guard and throw each on its own condition.
  • Argument guard throws the exception its own condition disproves src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettings.cs:202 — The guard on line 200 rejects `url` and line 202 reports that rejection as `ArgumentNullException` — but the condition's own test `string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(url)` is true of a value that is NOT null: it is satisfied by an EMPTY `url`, and on that path `url` was already proven non-null by the very expression that decided it (`||` short-circuits, so the null test to its left had to be false to get here). So a caller who passes a valid empty argument is told a parameter was null. That is not a wording problem: the exception type is the contract. A caller catching `ArgumentNullException` to handle a real null swallows the empty case with it, and whoever reads the stack trace later is told a failure the source disproves. .NET separates the two on purpose — `ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull` and `ArgumentException.ThrowIfNullOrEmpty` are two helpers because they are two failures. Throw `ArgumentException` for the empty case, or split the guard and throw each on its own condition.
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped · Untrusted text written into markup unescaped · ×2
  • Untrusted text written into markup unescaped src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettingsBase.cs:85 — `uriString` is text this program did not author, and it is written into the start of a URL attribute, where it chooses the scheme through a `StringBuilder` building markup with nothing encoding it for that place. Whoever controls the value controls the markup: it can close the element or attribute it sits in and open a script of its own. HTML encoding does not help here — a `javascript:` URL contains nothing it changes; allow only http(s) or a relative path.
  • Untrusted text written into markup unescaped src/NSwag.AspNetCore/SwaggerUiSettingsBase.cs:116 — `uriString` is text this program did not author, and it is written into the start of a URL attribute, where it chooses the scheme through markup this method returns with nothing encoding it for that place. Whoever controls the value controls the markup: it can close the element or attribute it sits in and open a script of its own. HTML encoding does not help here — a `javascript:` URL contains nothing it changes; allow only http(s) or a relative path.
AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
  • Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no automated accessibility check runs over the HTML your app renders. Assert the accessibility invariants over that HTML in the test suite you already have (parse the output and assert, or drive a browser), and gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 13 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
C1 · Data Protection · No data-protection/encryption · ×1
  • No data-protection/encryption — No data-protection or encryption usage (ASP.NET Data Protection, AES, column encryption, PBKDF2) was found — sensitive data at rest may be unprotected. If TDE/KMS/vault is delegated to infrastructure, ignore.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Build.Publish.get (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • Build.Publish.get (cognitive 18) build/Build.Publish.cs:31 — Build.Publish.get has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). None of this is in the body itself: all 18 points belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch (lines 35, 32). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:36 — src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:36-58 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Startup.cs:36-58 — `src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs` and `src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Startup.cs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:22 — src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:22-41 | src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:21-40 — `src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs` and `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:22` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17–18 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17–18 lines × 3) src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:35 — src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:35-52 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Startup.cs:35-51 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Startup.cs:35-52 — `src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs` and `src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Startup.cs` 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 2 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:35` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:107 — src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:107-122 | src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:117-132 — `src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs` and `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:90 — src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:90-103 | src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:100-113 — `src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs` and `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:90` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerExtensions.cs:123 — src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerExtensions.cs:123-130 | src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerExtensions.cs:194-201 — 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `null` to `Action<SwaggerUiSettings<WebApiOpenApiDocumentGeneratorSettings>> configure =` in one and `Action<ReDocSettings<WebApiOpenApiDocumentGeneratorSettings>> configure =` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Program.cs:10 — src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Program.cs:10-15 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Program.cs:10-15 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Program.cs:10-15 — `src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Program.cs` and `src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Program.cs` 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 6 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.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (42 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (42 lines × 2) REDACTED:33 — REDACTED:33-81 | REDACTED:33-74 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:17 — src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:17-32 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Startup.cs:17-32 | src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Startup.cs:17-32 — `src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs` and `src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Startup.cs` 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 2 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D44 · Platform End-of-Life · End-of-life runtime · ×1
  • End-of-life runtime: .NET net9.0 src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj:3 — src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj declares .NET net9.0 as this project's target framework, and .NET 9 STS, support ended 2026-05-12. An unsupported runtime receives no security patches, so every vulnerability disclosed in it since 2026-05-12 is present and unfixable without moving off it. This is a migration rather than an upgrade: there is no newer release of a runtime that has ended.
D8 · Code Coverage · Coverage not measured · ×1
  • Coverage not measured — no coverage collector is wired up — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Fake-async · ×1
  • Fake-async — async method never awaits src/NSwag.Commands/NSwagDocumentBase.cs:163 — `LoadAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Skipped test marks a known-real bug · ×1
  • Skipped test marks a known-real bug src/NSwag.Core.Tests/HttpLoadingTests.cs:47 — A test is skipped with reason "TODO" — the behavior it asserts is UNVERIFIED and this skip is likely the only marker of a real bug. It ages invisibly: fix the flakiness or track the bug somewhere that can't be forgotten.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Markup wires an event to an empty handler · ×1
  • Markup wires an event to an empty handler src/NSwagStudio/Views/DocumentView.xaml.cs:72 — `DocumentView.xaml` wires an event to `OnGenerate`, whose body is empty — the markup attaches a listener that does nothing. Implement the handler, or remove the attribute that wires it.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Comparison is always false · ×1
  • Comparison is always false — nothing compares equal to NaN REDACTED:76 — `Left == double.NaN` is false for every value, including NaN itself: IEEE 754 leaves NaN unordered with everything, so `==` against `double.NaN` never depends on the other operand. Use `double.IsNaN(…)` — the test that was intended, and the branch this guards is dead.
P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience · Outbound HTTP without resilience · ×1
  • Outbound HTTP without resilience — Outbound HTTP calls were found with no timeout or retry policy around them. This codebase ships libraries/tools rather than a service it operates, so the failure lands differently: an unbounded call hangs the caller's process — a build step, a CLI run, a UI thread — with no way out.
S1 · Cryptographic Hygiene · Third-party script without Subresource Integrity · ×1
  • Third-party script without Subresource Integrity REDACTED:18 — `https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/redoc/bundles/redoc.standalone.js` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. The URL also names no version, so it resolves to whatever that origin serves at fetch time — the executed bytes can change with nobody touching this repository. 2 such include(s) across the repository's markup.
X1 · Async correctness · Blocking `StreamReader.ReadToEnd` inside an `async` method · ×1
  • Blocking `StreamReader.ReadToEnd` inside an `async` method src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/SwaggerUiIndexMiddleware.cs:29 — `StreamReader.ReadToEnd` blocks the thread on I/O while `StreamReader.ReadToEndAsync` exists to wait without one — inside a method that is already `async`, await the twin.
X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Wait(…)` · ×1
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Wait(…)` src/NSwag.Commands/HostFactoryResolver.cs:253 — `.Wait(…)` blocks this thread until the task completes or the bound expires — sync-over-async: it can deadlock under a synchronization context and it parks a thread while it waits. `await` the task (with `.WaitAsync(timeout, token)` where the bound matters).
X13 · Undrained process stream · Redirected process stream is never drained (deadlock) · ×1
  • Redirected process stream is never drained (deadlock) src/NSwag.Commands/Commands/Generation/AspNetCore/ProjectMetadata.cs:238 — `RedirectStandardError` is set here, but nothing in this type ever reads `StandardError` — while `StandardOutput` is read to the end. The child blocks as soon as it fills the StandardError pipe (~4 KB, never more than 64 KB), and it can then never finish writing StandardOutput, so the read-to-end above never returns and the `WaitForExit` timeout beside it does not help: the timeout bounds the WAIT, not the read that precedes it. Drain both — read one stream on a background thread (`BeginErrorReadLine()` with an `ErrorDataReceived` handler, or a `Task` running the second `ReadToEndAsync()`) and await both before `WaitForExit()` — or stop redirecting the stream you do not consume.
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) · ×1
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/Program.cs:150 — `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
X5 · Nullable reference types · Symbol treated as nullable, then dereferenced unguarded · ×1
  • Symbol treated as nullable, then dereferenced unguarded src/NSwag.Generation/Processors/OperationResponseProcessorBase.cs:262 — This method contradicts itself about `returnParameter`: line 280 writes `returnParameter?.`, which says `returnParameter` can be null, but line 262 then dereferences it directly as `returnParameter.ParameterType` with no null test between them and no guard around it. If the `?.` is right, that dereference throws NullReferenceException on the input it was written for; if `returnParameter` truly cannot be null here, the `?.` is misleading. Settle it one way — test `returnParameter` once before the first use and handle the null case, or drop the `?.` — rather than leaving the two readings side by side.
Minor — 52 finding(s)
X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×20
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/MultipleClientsFromFirstTagAndPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs:63 — `!p.Contains('{') && !string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(p)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/MultipleClientsFromFirstTagAndPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/MultipleClientsFromPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/DefaultTemplateFactory.cs:29 — `!string.Equals(Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("NSWAG_NOVERSION"), "true", StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase) && !string.Equals(Environm…` appears character-identically in 3 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/DefaultTemplateFactory.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/MultipleClientsFromFirstTagAndPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs:43 — `GetClientName(document, op.Path, op.HttpMethod, op.Operation) == GetClientName(document, path, httpMethod, operation) && ConvertPathToName(o…` appears character-identically in 3 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/MultipleClientsFromFirstTagAndPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/MultipleClientsFromPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/OperationNameGenerators/SingleClientFromPathSegmentsOperationNameGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs:328 — `Settings.UseHttpAttributeNameAsOperationId && httpAttribute != null && !string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(httpAttribute.Name)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpOperationModel.cs:111 — `_actualOperationName == null && OperationName != null` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpOperationModel.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/Models/TypeScriptOperationModel.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiComponents.cs:26 — `args.Action != NotifyCollectionChangedAction.Add && args.Action != NotifyCollectionChangedAction.Replace` appears character-identically in 5 files — src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiComponents.cs, src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiDocument.cs, src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiOperation.cs, src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiPathItem.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:58 — `context.Exception != null && (_exceptionTypes.Count == 0 || _exceptionTypes.Exists(t => t.IsInstanceOfType(context.Exception)))` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs, src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs:44 — `context.Request.Path.HasValue && string.Equals(context.Request.Path.Value, _path, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs, src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Middlewares/OpenApiDocumentMiddleware.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/SwaggerUiIndexMiddleware.cs:23 — `context.Request.Path.HasValue && string.Equals(context.Request.Path.Value.Trim('/'), _indexPath.Trim('/'), StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCas…` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/Middlewares/SwaggerUiIndexMiddleware.cs, src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Middlewares/SwaggerUiIndexMiddleware.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs:339 — `description.Type == JsonObjectType.File || description.Format == JsonFormatStrings.Binary` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs:289 — `p.Kind == OpenApiParameterKind.Path && string.Equals(p.Name, parameterName, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpFileTemplateModel.cs:102 — `p.Value.IsBinary || p.Value.Item?.IsBinary == true || p.Value.Items.Any(i => i.IsBinary)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpFileTemplateModel.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/Models/TypeScriptFileTemplateModel.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpOperationModel.cs:291 — `parameter.CollectionFormat == OpenApiParameterCollectionFormat.Multi && !schema.Type.HasFlag(JsonObjectType.Array)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpOperationModel.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/Models/TypeScriptOperationModel.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation/Processors/OperationResponseProcessorBase.cs:298 — `returnType == null || returnType.FullName == "System.Void"` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/Processors/OperationResponseProcessor.cs, src/NSwag.Generation/Processors/OperationResponseProcessorBase.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpOperationModel.cs:265 — `schema.Type == JsonObjectType.Array && schema.Item.IsBinary` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/Models/CSharpOperationModel.cs, src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/Models/TypeScriptOperationModel.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs:96 — `statusCodeString != null && int.TryParse(statusCodeString, out var statusCode)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs, src/NSwag.AspNetCore/JsonExceptionFilterAttribute.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs:324 — `swaggerOperationAttribute != null && !string.IsNullOrEmpty(swaggerOperationAttribute.OperationId)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs:226 — `t.Item1.Path == operation.Path && t.Item1.Method == operation.Method` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/AspNetCoreOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/WebApiOpenApiDocumentGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs:336 — `typeInfo.Type == JsonObjectType.Array && type.GenericTypeArguments.Length > 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs:305 — `typeInfo.Type == JsonObjectType.File || typeInfo.Format == JsonFormatStrings.Binary || hasSwaggerFileAttribute || isFileArray` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs, src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/Processors/OperationParameterProcessor.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Commented-out code · ×10
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/Models/TypeScriptOperationModel.cs:182 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Core/Collections/ObservableDictionary.cs:225 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiDocument.Serialization.cs:89 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiDocument.Serialization.cs:92 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:51 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/Startup.cs:54 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Startup.cs:57 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/Startup.cs:60 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Startup.cs:51 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/Startup.cs:54 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Disabled test · ×3
  • Disabled test src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests/RequiredParameterTests.cs:62 — A test is skipped ("The C#11 required keyword does not mark schema properties as required") — coverage that looks present but never runs in any gate. If it's an opt-in suite, document how it runs; otherwise re-enable or delete it.
  • Disabled test src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Parameters/BodyParametersTests.cs:49 — A test is skipped ("Wrong in .Net 7") — coverage that looks present but never runs in any gate. If it's an opt-in suite, document how it runs; otherwise re-enable or delete it.
  • Disabled test src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests/Parameters/BodyParametersTests.cs:102 — A test is skipped ("Wrong in .Net 7") — coverage that looks present but never runs in any gate. If it's an opt-in suite, document how it runs; otherwise re-enable or delete it.
M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×2
  • README/code drift README.md:17 — README.md names Angular 2, but the manifest declares `angular` ^1.8.3. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift src/NSwag.Npm/README.md:1 — src/NSwag.Npm/README.md names Angular 2, but the manifest declares `angular` ^1.8.3. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D21 · Naming Consistency · The `Person` class used in test fixtures for C# and TypeScript code generation tests is named identically (`Person`), but it is defined in two separate test classes (`NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.CodeGenerationTests` and `NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.CodeGenerationTests`). While this is not a naming inconsistency per se, the duplication of the `Person` type across these distinct test namespaces suggests a lack of shared test fixture abstraction. However, strictly following the rules, these are different concepts (fixtures for different generators) and thus not an inconsistency. · ×1
  • The `Person` class used in test fixtures for C# and TypeScript code generation tests is named identically (`Person`), but it is defined in two separate test classes (`NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.CodeGenerationTests` and `NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.CodeGenerationTests`). While this is not a naming inconsistency per se, the duplication of the `Person` type across these distinct test namespaces suggests a lack of shared test fixture abstraction. However, strictly following the rules, these are different concepts (fixtures for different generators) and thus not an inconsistency. — No action required. (symbols: NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.CodeGenerationTests.Person.LastName, NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.CodeGenerationTests.Person.LastName)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Similar to the `LastName` property, the `Sex` property is duplicated in test fixtures. This is a consistent pattern across the two test suites, not an inconsistency. · ×1
  • Similar to the `LastName` property, the `Sex` property is duplicated in test fixtures. This is a consistent pattern across the two test suites, not an inconsistency. — No action required. (symbols: NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.Tests.CodeGenerationTests.Person.Sex, NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.Tests.CodeGenerationTests.Person.Sex)
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
  • Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 1 of 15 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; 15 of the 66 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/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/Program.cs. 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.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned file · ×1
  • Orphaned file src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/Program.cs:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
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
M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1
  • No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1
  • Logging is not universal — Only 1/19 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log). Of those 19, 8 ship a process this repository operates; the rest are libraries their consumer hosts, where the logging decision belongs to the host.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No release approval gate · ×1
  • No release approval gate — The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all async methods take a CancellationToken · ×1
  • Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 8/62 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
X5 · Nullable reference types · Nullable reference types not enabled everywhere · ×1
  • Nullable reference types not enabled everywhere — 3/8 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.
Minor — 28 finding(s)
D19 · Documentation Quality · XML-doc coverage · ×27
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.CodeGeneration(netstandard2.0) src/NSwag.CodeGeneration/NSwag.CodeGeneration.csproj — NSwag.CodeGeneration(netstandard2.0): 99 % XML-doc coverage (187/189).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwagStudio src/NSwagStudio/NSwagStudio.csproj — NSwagStudio: 29 % XML-doc coverage (51/174).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Annotations(net462) src/NSwag.Annotations/NSwag.Annotations.csproj — NSwag.Annotations(net462): 100 % XML-doc coverage (69/69).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Core(net462) src/NSwag.Core/NSwag.Core.csproj — NSwag.Core(net462): 91 % XML-doc coverage (275/302).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.AspNet.Owin src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/NSwag.AspNet.Owin.csproj — NSwag.AspNet.Owin: 88 % XML-doc coverage (64/73).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.AspNet.WebApi src/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi/NSwag.AspNet.WebApi.csproj — NSwag.AspNet.WebApi: 100 % XML-doc coverage (5/5).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Commands(net462) src/NSwag.Commands/NSwag.Commands.csproj — NSwag.Commands(net462): 28 % XML-doc coverage (111/395).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Console src/NSwag.Console/NSwag.Console.csproj — NSwag.Console: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Generation(netstandard2.0) src/NSwag.Generation/NSwag.Generation.csproj — NSwag.Generation(netstandard2.0): 100 % XML-doc coverage (92/92).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp(netstandard2.0) src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp/NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp.csproj — NSwag.CodeGeneration.CSharp(netstandard2.0): 100 % XML-doc coverage (188/188).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript(netstandard2.0) src/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript/NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript.csproj — NSwag.CodeGeneration.TypeScript(netstandard2.0): 100 % XML-doc coverage (155/155).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Generation.WebApi(net462) src/NSwag.Generation.WebApi/NSwag.Generation.WebApi.csproj — NSwag.Generation.WebApi(net462): 65 % XML-doc coverage (20/31).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.AspNetCore(net462) src/NSwag.AspNetCore/NSwag.AspNetCore.csproj — NSwag.AspNetCore(net462): 86 % XML-doc coverage (82/95).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.ConsoleCore(net8.0) src/NSwag.ConsoleCore/NSwag.ConsoleCore.csproj — NSwag.ConsoleCore(net8.0): 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/6).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Console.x86 src/NSwag.Console.x86/NSwag.Console.x86.csproj — NSwag.Console.x86: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Core.Yaml(netstandard2.0) src/NSwag.Core.Yaml/NSwag.Core.Yaml.csproj — NSwag.Core.Yaml(netstandard2.0): 100 % XML-doc coverage (12/12).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore(net462) src/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore/NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.csproj — NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore(net462): 75 % XML-doc coverage (27/36).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher(net8.0) src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.csproj — NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher(net8.0): 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/3).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86 src/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86/NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86.csproj — NSwag.AspNetCore.Launcher.x86: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/3).
  • XML-doc coverage: _build build/_build.csproj — _build: 7 % XML-doc coverage (1/14).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Sample.NET80 src/NSwag.Sample.NET80/NSwag.Sample.NET80.csproj — NSwag.Sample.NET80: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/23).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal src/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal.csproj — NSwag.Sample.NET80Minimal: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/2).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Sample.NET90 src/NSwag.Sample.NET90/NSwag.Sample.NET90.csproj — NSwag.Sample.NET90: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/22).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal src/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal/NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal.csproj — NSwag.Sample.NET90Minimal: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/2).
  • XML-doc coverage: NSwag.Sample.NET100 src/NSwag.Sample.NET100/NSwag.Sample.NET100.csproj — NSwag.Sample.NET100: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/22).
  • + 2 more in this group — see findings.md.
D10 · Test Quality · Mock framework · ×1
  • Mock framework: Moq — NSwag.Generation.AspNetCore.Tests(net8.0) references Moq.

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.

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-c46a2dca5e3c45e4824e1b922e05ff61/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/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-c46a2dca5e3c45e4824e1b922e05ff61/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/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 .53artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnet—dotnet list src/NSwag.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json1artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—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. semgrep could not parse 12 file(s) — `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui-es-bundle-core.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNet.Owin/SwaggerUi/swagger-ui.js`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/Extensions/NSwagServiceCollectionExtensions.cs`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/HttpRequestExtension.cs`, `src/NSwag.AspNetCore/OAuth2ClientSettings.cs`, … (+7 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.0—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—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 Confinementruntime-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 Confinementruntime-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 Enforcementruntime-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 Dependenciestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a16893-238e-74e1-bb6c-6b45736bf19d · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Appendix C — Personal-data map

Every field, property and record parameter whose name is conventional personal data — 7 field(s) across 2 categories, each with an exact repo-relative file:line. This is the data inventory a compliance review starts from — right-to-erasure, retention, minimisation. Detected by NAME, from the C# syntax tree, with a deliberately specific identifier classifier — the same one the C1–C5 compliance cards use to decide whether personal data is present, so CardDefinition or FileName don't trip. Two caveats stated rather than glossed: those cards additionally require corroboration (a persistence/account signal, or two distinct PII categories) that this inventory deliberately does not, so it lists more than they gate on; and D32 Data Compliance shares nothing with it — that dimension is a separate semgrep ruleset for personal data leaking into logs, URLs and browser storage, and a clean D32 result says nothing about this list. Informational — it feeds no score.

Name — 6 field(s)
  • Person.FirstName REDACTED:11
  • Person.LastName REDACTED:15
  • Person.FirstName REDACTED:11
  • Person.LastName REDACTED:15
  • Person.FirstName REDACTED:11
  • Person.LastName REDACTED:15
Email — 1 field(s)
  • OpenApiContact.Email src/NSwag.Core/OpenApiContact.cs:27

Issues: 68 · Warnings: 150 · Recommendations: 52 · Info: 28 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 23-10-2026 @ 11:43 UTC.

Downloadable artifacts

Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif⬇ Health changelog .md