{"$schema":"https://json.schemastore.org/sarif-2.1.0.json","version":"2.1.0","runs":[{"tool":{"driver":{"name":"codehealth","informationUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev","rules":[{"id":"D1","name":"Cyclomatic Complexity","shortDescription":{"text":"Cyclomatic Complexity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D1"},{"id":"D2","name":"Cognitive Complexity","shortDescription":{"text":"Cognitive Complexity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D2"},{"id":"D3","name":"God Classes","shortDescription":{"text":"God Classes"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D3"},{"id":"D7","name":"Architectural Integrity","shortDescription":{"text":"Architectural Integrity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D7"},{"id":"D9","name":"Test Distribution","shortDescription":{"text":"Test Distribution"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D9"},{"id":"D10","name":"Test Quality","shortDescription":{"text":"Test Quality"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D10"},{"id":"D13","name":"Secret Scanning","shortDescription":{"text":"Secret Scanning"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D13","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-259","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-798","CWE-259"]}},{"id":"D17","name":"Explicit Debt","shortDescription":{"text":"Explicit Debt"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D17"},{"id":"D19","name":"Documentation Quality","shortDescription":{"text":"Documentation Quality"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D19"},{"id":"D20","name":"ADR Quality","shortDescription":{"text":"ADR Quality"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D20"},{"id":"D21","name":"Naming Consistency","shortDescription":{"text":"Naming Consistency"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D21"},{"id":"D28","name":"Secrets (history)","shortDescription":{"text":"Secrets (history)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D28","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-259","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-798","CWE-259"]}},{"id":"D29","name":"Static Analysis (SAST)","shortDescription":{"text":"Static Analysis (SAST)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D29","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-79","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-89","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-78","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-94","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-77","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-79","CWE-89","CWE-78","CWE-94","CWE-77"]}},{"id":"D30","name":"Dependency Vulnerabilities","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency Vulnerabilities"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D30","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-1395","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-937","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-1395","CWE-937"]}},{"id":"D35","name":"Change Coupling","shortDescription":{"text":"Change Coupling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D35"},{"id":"D36","name":"Supply-chain Provenance \u0026 Signing","shortDescription":{"text":"Supply-chain Provenance \u0026 Signing"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D36","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-494","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-1357","CWE-494"]}},{"id":"D43","name":"Malicious Dependencies","shortDescription":{"text":"Malicious Dependencies"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D43","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-506","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-506"]}},{"id":"AX10","name":"Code composition","shortDescription":{"text":"Code composition"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AX10"},{"id":"M1","name":"Documentation (README)","shortDescription":{"text":"Documentation (README)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M1"},{"id":"M2","name":"Architecture documentation","shortDescription":{"text":"Architecture documentation"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M2"},{"id":"M3","name":"Folder \u0026 project structure","shortDescription":{"text":"Folder \u0026 project structure"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M3"},{"id":"M4","name":"Documentation accuracy","shortDescription":{"text":"Documentation accuracy"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M4"},{"id":"P1","name":"CI/CD gates","shortDescription":{"text":"CI/CD gates"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P1"},{"id":"P12","name":"CI test-gate honesty","shortDescription":{"text":"CI test-gate honesty"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P12"},{"id":"P3","name":"Security \u0026 performance tooling","shortDescription":{"text":"Security \u0026 performance tooling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P3"},{"id":"P6","name":"Release Hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Release Hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P6"},{"id":"R1","name":"Type Safety","shortDescription":{"text":"Type Safety"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R1"},{"id":"R10","name":"Code Duplication","shortDescription":{"text":"Code Duplication"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R10"},{"id":"R2","name":"Cyclomatic Complexity","shortDescription":{"text":"Cyclomatic Complexity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R2"},{"id":"R3","name":"Large Files","shortDescription":{"text":"Large Files"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R3"},{"id":"R4","name":"Test Coverage","shortDescription":{"text":"Test Coverage"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R4"},{"id":"R6","name":"Tooling","shortDescription":{"text":"Tooling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R6"},{"id":"R7","name":"Dead Code","shortDescription":{"text":"Dead Code"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R7"},{"id":"R9","name":"Circular Imports","shortDescription":{"text":"Circular Imports"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/R9"},{"id":"X9","name":"Subsumed condition operand","shortDescription":{"text":"Subsumed condition operand"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X9"}]}},"results":[{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"run-evals.runDeterministic (cyclomatic 67): run-evals.runDeterministic has cyclomatic complexity 67 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This file is where this pass\u0027s cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: scripts/run-evals.js holds 3 of the 5 methods over the threshold \u2014 including the worst \u2014 and 68 of the 84 points over it (81%), 8.5\u00D7 the next-largest file (scripts/lib/skill-lint.js at 8). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":198}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"62950967826e1eb0b19964d7152391aaffc2df9e6eff7a7cae1ce6e46c11dd7d"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"run-evals.parseGrading (cyclomatic 26): run-evals.parseGrading has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This file is where this pass\u0027s cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: scripts/run-evals.js holds 3 of the 5 methods over the threshold \u2014 including the worst \u2014 and 68 of the 84 points over it (81%), 8.5\u00D7 the next-largest file (scripts/lib/skill-lint.js at 8). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":429}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"72b8fd3ad700639993f2e8a44d550ffeeefdf5deb3fc4ef233498e1b322b88ff"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"skill-lint.lintSkillContent (cyclomatic 23): skill-lint.lintSkillContent has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint.js"},"region":{"startLine":253}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"55ffe2437f2363379a4d6331c7681f28fbdb8bd0684fa275085f213f9f96b2fd"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"validate-commands.main (cyclomatic 23): validate-commands.main has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). Of this number, 22 points are the body\u0027s own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands.js"},"region":{"startLine":101}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bc0c7ec8af3398216053af8e65441b9b9615932aac3d7d8723c6088aef9c8db5"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"run-evals.runBehavioral (cyclomatic 20): run-evals.runBehavioral has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This file is where this pass\u0027s cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: scripts/run-evals.js holds 3 of the 5 methods over the threshold \u2014 including the worst \u2014 and 68 of the 84 points over it (81%), 8.5\u00D7 the next-largest file (scripts/lib/skill-lint.js at 8). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":509}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f7c153fb3a4646ca4c85fb0e6e46bbd9e838edd6069554a2b76dbedcc88c47c5"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"run-evals.runDeterministic (cognitive 108): run-evals.runDeterministic has cognitive complexity 108 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (62 pts), boolean chains 22, loops 8 (15 pts), error handling 1 (5 pts), ternaries 4 (nesting depth added 47). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass\u0027s cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: scripts/run-evals.js holds 3 of the 7 methods over the threshold \u2014 including the worst \u2014 and 118 of the 171 points over it (69%), 5.4\u00D7 the next-largest file (scripts/validate-commands.js at 22). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":198}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8f7493aa1d740f7cf833740cb85fe3a7063696ec58353a9fd43c098fe36703da"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"validate-commands.main (cognitive 37): validate-commands.main has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), loops 6 (9 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 14). Of this number, 36 points are the body\u0027s own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands.js"},"region":{"startLine":101}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"648812813edec8abd2a92e6adbdb6c4596ee00f53aff60b54bc79eeb6fcb5764"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"skill-lint.lintSkillContent (cognitive 33): skill-lint.lintSkillContent has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (24 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint.js"},"region":{"startLine":253}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c046d9b43d3be7c35ebd15e82298031ed1d9e43a7fc14704f869813670d0449e"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"run-evals.runBehavioral (cognitive 29): run-evals.runBehavioral has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), ternaries 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass\u0027s cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: scripts/run-evals.js holds 3 of the 7 methods over the threshold \u2014 including the worst \u2014 and 118 of the 171 points over it (69%), 5.4\u00D7 the next-largest file (scripts/validate-commands.js at 22). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":509}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"45650e1c9b71db4667e1bb66dee4f598c19a9484e5418e81d5cdfa5861f865c6"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"run-evals.parseGrading (cognitive 26): run-evals.parseGrading has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (15 pts), boolean chains 8, error handling 1, loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass\u0027s cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: scripts/run-evals.js holds 3 of the 7 methods over the threshold \u2014 including the worst \u2014 and 118 of the 171 points over it (69%), 5.4\u00D7 the next-largest file (scripts/validate-commands.js at 22). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":429}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a9c5c283c9482e6ab624590c4fd839a9e09284d00deb4b70127b57c748ec03f4"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"validate-skills.main (cognitive 22): validate-skills.main has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 4 (9 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), if/else 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-skills.js"},"region":{"startLine":25}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d64b8ebeadb6ddc2cd041e03beb7be8117171bad00ea02bbfd6dd3b9c355c936"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"validate-reference-links.main (cognitive 21): validate-reference-links.main has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-reference-links.js"},"region":{"startLine":92}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"fd3ee8ef02ecba77b6ed5c1c2003371c0a5d23df812644f122ebee72a343f2f2"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FunctionTooLong: run-evals.runDeterministic: FunctionTooLong \u2014 runDeterministic runs 141 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 41 over it, 1.41\u00D7 the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body \u2014 the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name \u2014 into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":198}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a59bbabf420d16da2465ce76f4fff84f4eb0c8d73c8bdb7e2c788754631e8756"}},{"ruleId":"D19","level":"note","message":{"text":"Documentation: no installation or build instructions: The README does not provide installation or build instructions for the agent-skills repository itself. Add a short install/build section covering cloning the repo, running setup commands (e.g. npx skills add), and any prerequisites."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"README.md"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1fa6bfcd5c6ae231d1b8ee99bced50b832d1f61cde9da6cbb533467b879a57db"}},{"ruleId":"D19","level":"note","message":{"text":"Documentation: no usage examples: The README does not show how to run an agent with the skills locally or point readers to a worked example. Add a Usage section with a quick-start code block showing how to load a skill into a system prompt, rules file, or conversation."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"README.md"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1355eb4e127a4bc9236772ce1c46f09510aa9286e7a06d1e47f308229df19049"}},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"dcc16beaa20ac8c39c3eef662c387f7c931344460c88ae5b449831886c9227a5"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"449c275a586b22c2cbea49cfe3f9d723505236fa47a302d53d823968f3baa58d"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9cfac867994d96fc66d218ff32f4f953c27c7227db707ff96b6b375f2056f6ad"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ddcbb929abd2e58ad359becb771f2dfb2bf2a30da7645980414be2ab69b984d1"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"59288bc6ebe58e88479ba87791fd142b7a8ea4daf1b110e469bec48af8e3c4cd"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7ec44d73bf7bd95702a3827e19647018a6fd58e70f6fd036f1598fe050f18bd4"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0c080458539fb7da47dc3de6cd9ef0e23929ae57348893f2ac8299a897ca82e0"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7f9b403681fc4270f8587376b01f3158ba4548c9d8cb3c13a2ec733097b53c35"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2b167738603ec2a9123288252f140dee2ccf66453d89e461140a5e091dad70de"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D30","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"83624e2a75b102d656da943ab10c203006d969612030d1669428c03d4067940e"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"warning","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9658270ba49f37ed04e99ab1263b6393cd42aed8bdfb7aafd9fa1070f5491895"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ace515990e7ee0f17b5c17e44dd168a5bdecf90804a3a3dd845cf05540978013"}},{"ruleId":"D43","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ca77df8ac0ed56a2e42b0923be81cca477f3174e98a1dc599981adac6a376eef"}},{"ruleId":"M2","level":"note","message":{"text":"ADRs not easily discoverable: 1 ADR-shaped document(s) detected by content \u2014 \u0060skills/documentation-and-adrs/SKILL.md\u0060. They are not under a conventional ADR folder (docs/adr/) and are not named NNNN-title.md, and this check found them by their decision signature rather than by where they live \u2014 so a reader who does not already know these paths has no route to them. Detected by content signature only: records kept outside the repository, or written without a Status/Decision/Consequences shape, are not visible to this check and are not counted here."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ea921cf64dae701abd877090b3279ff10d03c2e3250e26c8c299d7c5665e0d3f"}},{"ruleId":"M3","level":"note","message":{"text":"No tests/ separation: Tests aren\u0027t grouped in a dedicated test folder \u2014 the test surface isn\u0027t separable from production code at a glance."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"999e0c784909c76b6346a705ee63961fe363ed1cd6a94e3f80e2ebe7820ccd5d"}},{"ruleId":"P1","level":"note","message":{"text":"CI build step not evidenced: A CI pipeline exists but no build step was matched \u2014 changes may merge without the build ever running. A build step may be invoked directly as a command, or declared as a task that a runner named in the pipeline resolves."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"251015acef1a259fcc13b7c60660cc8917ccb3ae8056cb5165ae03312dd586e8"}},{"ruleId":"P3","level":"note","message":{"text":"No SAST: No static application security testing detected. For this repository\u0027s stack, add bandit, \u0060semgrep --config=p/python\u0060, or CodeQL\u0027s python pack as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 4639 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge\u0027s web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen \u2014 if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6e54424179c892f03ef2fd003130ac4bd43f39bbf3b1ca0a0143e25acb80ec87"}},{"ruleId":"P6","level":"note","message":{"text":"No changelog: No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file \u2014 what shipped when isn\u0027t easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)"},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"dda5aa5aed8cbb292c3ef2b733bc138f614293ae6426c85e98bf31ef330d9415"}},{"ruleId":"R1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Type Safety: 0 typed \u00B7 13 plain JS \u2014 the untyped files are scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js, scripts/lib/skill-lint.js, scripts/run-evals-test.js, scripts/run-evals.js, scripts/validate-artifact-paths-test.js, scripts/validate-artifact-paths.js (\u002B7 more)."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d00ee7953f55325a823d27e5db9657c80ca9b9861c0c0abf8fe487cd3fa586d3"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block with local edits (27 matched lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-artifact-paths-test.js:12 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:16 \u2014 the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited \u2014 211 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row\u0027s finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters \u2014 or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-artifact-paths-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":12}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2cf44c920ffb79fd23490ca3b5fc22a4d2b7eeb8fa33ed86c6c5e1ea33c400d7"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block with local edits (18 matched lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-versions-test.js:6 \u00B7 scripts/validate-versions.js:6 \u2014 the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited \u2014 90 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row\u0027s finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters \u2014 or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-versions-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":6}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"be1c01b12363c459c84fc9c78b6a2f2f86dc25a3d21c94d07b0443a1b0100325"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (13 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:36 \u00B7 scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:57 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":36}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"716a4ec5c5e77d3c74b10934c13b83da98015107f59c6ceedfd0093ef5e72974"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:217 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:242 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":217}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"61c5940e42f7c165fb672691744d42478f52a3db0fa99593c6481955d2bf4ecd"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:311 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:409 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":311}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"563c053f2bf2e9f71318957d4e4e6df63fc07de86a204e3fdcff5b1ff312cba8"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-artifact-paths.js:95 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links.js:123 \u2014 the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-artifact-paths.js"},"region":{"startLine":95}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b0478ae623244afdc1c934423e44c17887761d1d355d133e88e77d692402343b"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 3 locations): scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:122 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:148 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:225 \u2014 all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":122}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0e52834cb460f7fd84c1d57eecf264316a62b4f0fa71108d4040f7b5375db2be"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:337 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:384 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":337}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"4ae9cb7ab703dc4b96575b6fe59067fca2b5704de06bf52c5750be587d1ca877"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 5 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:446 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:460 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:479 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:500 \u00B7 \u002B1 more site(s) not listed \u2014 all 5 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":446}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2f48e49a5df96fa98454716f63b46e04a9d57bd2f7e33fdb3278bee54861bb20"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 3 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:464 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:563 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:590 \u2014 all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":464}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2a2459f663a537f50940f45de2ce1412a852d70d4cc1742f587fdc56d4096e4f"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 3 locations): scripts/validate-commands-test.js:102 \u00B7 scripts/validate-commands-test.js:167 \u00B7 scripts/validate-commands-test.js:180 \u2014 all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":102}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"24960781d1d172fcabaad1678679079331f4ab6f69ecfedba455e27a88414d01"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-commands-test.js:154 \u00B7 scripts/validate-commands-test.js:205 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":154}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a5636b7120c96ff7d23eb35f30a1165d4c28c399d2e64e6a5ad73af705434973"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:94 \u00B7 scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:103 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":94}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e236335a5619df0de0978d4b12e1248d6674e398f0e390a0f8f9d1890f709bb8"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:174 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:188 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":174}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b1c24c10cdf8682f7deb169316d90b45660bc743c0187c0b19a9c66e139f158c"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:433 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:450 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":433}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c7ca29091c526b5674cf9812117066e077ddd5d9e598edf0bfbda055cc352ef6"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:499 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:522 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":499}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"74e46b321708f30134d9678afaa3263f3165ca632e22207b48a3b4be875683ea"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 5 locations): scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:43 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:58 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:80 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:91 \u00B7 \u002B1 more site(s) not listed \u2014 all 5 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":43}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"61c842f65f2059016f6ba21660106300dc3c46aa400f8ada42eb877b7003825c"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:321 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:340 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":321}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a9c20e476b1e31602d9e3470da4979bbe0bd5b0fd2575ed643f68e65576ff4b1"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 4 locations): scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:79 \u00B7 scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:97 \u00B7 scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:106 \u00B7 scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js:129 \u2014 all 4 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":79}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"02089b9b9626c1d258e1f693b38c453f7ac726c1e3f3f1a9de4882788791e143"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block with local edits (7 matched lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/lib/skill-lint.js:135 \u00B7 scripts/validate-commands.js:58 \u2014 the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited \u2014 85 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row\u0027s finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters \u2014 or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint.js"},"region":{"startLine":135}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c21ea66b212de5ffce09901986329ba7e5f94a7958e0111092aa9b9a8dbd89c3"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 19 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:153 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:171 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:185 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:199 \u00B7 \u002B15 more site(s) not listed \u2014 the 19 copies are spread across 4 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":153}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"cc57f0588e1492d6d82ded82db96637c2c8120237a87b44e1ced748456506370"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 8 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:264 \u00B7 scripts/validate-artifact-paths-test.js:53 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:56 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:89 \u00B7 \u002B4 more site(s) not listed \u2014 the 8 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":264}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3548503163dcb35fb5a71e068594e741cd6e82b91b189b74993b5648180026fa"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:299 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:416 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":299}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"678c16b7004d6426184d75b76c9a6a61bcd0c794fc7940d51bc855263b2fdc76"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-commands-test.js:24 \u00B7 scripts/validate-reference-links-test.js:21 \u2014 the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block \u2014 it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead \u2014 the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in \u2014 and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":24}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d413308d35e9a6b209f18bcd083ea21a280d6dbc13c1e8c5bbe163722a294058"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/validate-commands-test.js:175 \u00B7 scripts/validate-commands-test.js:200 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":175}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9746fce4347aed6450bc2edcfae4dde710d89630ec86408e660526e0bb69ea63"}},{"ruleId":"R10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (6 lines \u00D7 2 locations): scripts/run-evals-test.js:513 \u00B7 scripts/run-evals-test.js:595 \u2014 all 2 copies are in the same file, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct \u2014 and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal\u0027s entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins \u2014 a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":513}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"41b3065e8b24a9d8e0f8c6ce522bc51988791329be37a37d29a8978d44fd5751"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function runDeterministic (cyclomatic 67, cognitive 110): runDeterministic has cyclomatic complexity 67 and cognitive complexity 110; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":198}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"134b64a5082ccd5a1d8e97486cf21b14f006a3c27b185f676a031a6147ac08e9"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function parseGrading (cyclomatic 26, cognitive 27): parseGrading has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 27; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":429}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0e7eb58431a978165e4694e1a585faab3b42c886f5361a25b1f1d43539727350"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function main (cyclomatic 25, cognitive 40): main has cyclomatic complexity 25 and cognitive complexity 40; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-commands.js"},"region":{"startLine":101}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8dcbb29f00a79c226edcacebdc3cf0dd5549d9d9fd1a973403923b6362e60b54"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function lintSkillContent (cyclomatic 23, cognitive 33): lintSkillContent has cyclomatic complexity 23 and cognitive complexity 33; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint.js"},"region":{"startLine":253}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1bd38fd75d40b22cf702f67a92edc0dd5b8a48cf7ddd971a4b15dbe7166d1af4"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function runBehavioral (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 29): runBehavioral has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 29; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":509}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e06c6a9d5bba8fef36c39af20dd5d53a8ad421f259224e18098e6d26692b7d4e"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function stem (cyclomatic 14, cognitive 12): stem has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth \u2014 arms side by side rather than stacked \u2014 and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":69}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"63b1f563a7307951e5b6913d3044bfebfc0a87c7a80a6cdb2ae76c37c316f3ef"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function main (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 21): main has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 21; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-reference-links.js"},"region":{"startLine":92}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"068d54a2c20de9816226de7a9aa447c95e3c650a4bf13295d68c62ef1afa67a9"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function main (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 21): main has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 21; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/validate-skills.js"},"region":{"startLine":25}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"94bcb3132832edf6ac57254a9e6686d1376bd8312e4bb35af9e26c899fbe292e"}},{"ruleId":"R2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14): (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side \u2014 extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository\u0027s own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint.js"},"region":{"startLine":185}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e7879216c2eb31632e56bf8fefaeb524847187c2a5b3230fd9c5d63cfb154e0b"}},{"ruleId":"R4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No test reaches this file: No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL \u2014 if neither does, no test reaches this one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals.js"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"50c334b88b7c64589a04360a146774f2730272f44efd6c39ae7cb5ce7c4466a0"}},{"ruleId":"R4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No test reaches this file: No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL \u2014 if neither does, no test reaches this one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/run-evals-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6e4a86377f440c6731a075f11a2a477261e0c8b8c41648ce0473da3d481d84a4"}},{"ruleId":"R4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No test reaches this file: No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL \u2014 if neither does, no test reaches this one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"scripts/lib/skill-lint-test.js"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"697b40088fe24f8b63c3ab45332448c6f0b29d1da44e9b756543fb367b6d4b52"}},{"ruleId":"R6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Tooling: test \u2713 \u00B7 lint \u2713 \u00B7 typecheck \u2717 \u2014 read from this repository\u0027s package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: \u0060test\u0060 for the suite, \u0060lint\u0060 or \u0060prettier\u0060 for linting, \u0060typecheck\u0060/\u0060type-check\u0060/\u0060tsc\u0060 for type checking. \u2717 therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline \u2014 a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A \u2713 means the wiring is DECLARED \u2014 a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6414565cf9eb696f433e9a050db240f75c6745118dbd6a1bc36b7f87d97782db"}}],"taxonomies":[{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d","organization":"MITRE","informationUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/","isComprehensive":false,"shortDescription":{"text":"The MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)."},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","guid":"e4d2e772-757e-0a5c-bd7d-77052949d866","name":"Reliance on Insufficiently Trustworthy Component","shortDescription":{"text":"Reliance on Insufficiently Trustworthy Component"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1357.html"},{"id":"CWE-1395","guid":"800e09e7-c11a-8654-9fa6-86f398995fed","name":"Dependency on Vulnerable Third-Party Component","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency on Vulnerable Third-Party Component"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1395.html"},{"id":"CWE-259","guid":"ae9ad959-fbb6-9d5e-892d-3dca66da0b69","name":"Use of Hard-coded Password","shortDescription":{"text":"Use of Hard-coded Password"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/259.html"},{"id":"CWE-353","guid":"09d7e902-d4ee-f05d-ae6c-0a1554d0c18f","name":"CWE-353","shortDescription":{"text":"CWE-353"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/353.html"},{"id":"CWE-494","guid":"b8a65e0d-e459-4a55-a931-fc1136482375","name":"Download of Code Without Integrity Check","shortDescription":{"text":"Download of Code Without Integrity Check"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/494.html"},{"id":"CWE-506","guid":"401d6455-56e3-0552-9a39-f77461673e3f","name":"CWE-506","shortDescription":{"text":"CWE-506"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/506.html"},{"id":"CWE-77","guid":"332c8ade-6612-9f56-a06b-d8d90b1a8750","name":"Command Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"Command Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/77.html"},{"id":"CWE-78","guid":"2e31ceaf-c7ae-2e5e-9661-cfb1362789cf","name":"OS Command Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"OS Command Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/78.html"},{"id":"CWE-79","guid":"fd45580b-e8c4-fc5e-8c2f-aa8fab0b4dbf","name":"Cross-site Scripting (XSS)","shortDescription":{"text":"Cross-site Scripting (XSS)"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/79.html"},{"id":"CWE-798","guid":"5e8f057d-fee3-995a-a0cb-9fc5b0d174d1","name":"Use of Hard-coded Credentials","shortDescription":{"text":"Use of Hard-coded Credentials"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/798.html"},{"id":"CWE-89","guid":"6d08fdad-37eb-c150-bbf0-d7d946863407","name":"SQL Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"SQL Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/89.html"},{"id":"CWE-937","guid":"16f316ae-415c-b354-a59b-1f7905f756e9","name":"Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities","shortDescription":{"text":"Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/937.html"},{"id":"CWE-94","guid":"75e7f50c-6c2f-dd52-bf40-bf6c52b861fd","name":"Code Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"Code Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/94.html"}]}],"properties":{"codehealthPublication":{"public":true,"notice":"This is the PUBLIC form of this artifact. Findings are listed in full, but the details of SECURITY findings \u2014 which rule fired, in which file, on which line, and how to fix it \u2014 are deliberately withheld, and any secret-scanner results are excluded entirely. Where detail is absent here it was REMOVED FOR PUBLICATION; it is not missing from the analysis. The complete artifact is available from the repository owner.","securityFindingsRedacted":13,"secretScannerRunsExcluded":0}},"redactionTokens":["A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."]}]}