Public report of alfredorueda/HexaStock, published 22 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, 22 October 2026, 09:09 UTC · Survey ID cd_5397e1f1071c481386ae26626334e8ce

alfredorueda/HexaStock

Measured 22 October 2026, 09:08 UTC, at code version 66f44bd

Supply-chain provenance & signing is not measured: Supply-chain provenance is not scored (this pipeline releases no artifact), but its build steps or GitHub Actions workflows have integrity defects, or nothing watches its dependency set for published advisories.

CAI score 50out of 100 Adequate
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Down 3 since the last survey

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

A small codebase: 5,644 lines of product code in 8 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.1 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 36

Findings by how serious they are

7 critical 45 serious 108 minor

17 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
22 October 2026, 09:08 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 ▸

66of 71 dimensions measured by tools. The other 5 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
151of 160 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 9 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
71dimensions across 6 lenses, read from 5,644 lines of product code in 8 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

alfredorueda/HexaStock scores 50 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while five of its six lenses score higher still: Security and Compliance at 97, rated Exemplary, Architecture at 86, rated Strong, and Code Health at 74, Maturity at 59 and Domain Modelling at 54, all rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those five because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 36 and is rated Weak. Its Observability dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to adopt SLF4J (with a Logback or Log4j2 JSON encoder) and log at meaningful points in the modules you run and to define repositories per aggregate root and keep the query handle inside them; reach child entities through their root so invariants can't be bypassed, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 50 to about 62.

Seven findings are critical: four in Static Analysis (SAST), two in ADR Conformance and one in Secrets (history).

Watchdog couldn't measure 16 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 5,644 lines, which would take an estimated 0.1 person-years, around €12,000, to rebuild.

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

How the score is built: what each lens counts 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.
Production Readiness 36 · counts for 46%Domain Modelling 54 · counts for 25%Maturity 59 · counts for 14%Code Health 74 · counts for 8%Architecture 86 · counts for 4%Security and Compliance 97 · counts for 2%

If Production Readiness rose from 36 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 50 to about 62.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 52%Tests 48%
New since the last survey: 1 finding

This critical or serious finding wasn't in the previous survey, on 8 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.

Rebuild cost: about €12,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€3,900 to €20,000, for 65 to 206 hours of work, about 0.1 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 50. 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.
SizeSmall: 5,644 lines of product code

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

Top priorities

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

1
Adopt SLF4J (with a Logback or Log4j2 JSON encoder) and log at meaningful points in the modules you run.
Raises the score by about 6 points · Medium effort · Observability
2
Define repositories per aggregate root and keep the query handle inside them; reach child entities through their root so invariants can't be bypassed.
Raises the score by about 4 points · Medium effort · Repository granularity
3
Replace Hibernate ddl-auto with Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate` so the production schema can evolve safely and reproducibly.
Raises the score by about 4 points · Medium effort · Schema migrations

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 €12,000 to build again, about 0.1 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 36 (Weak). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Production Readiness grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Production Readiness actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Adopt SLF4J (with a Logback or Log4j2 JSON encoder) and log at meaningful points in the modules you run. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 6 points for medium effort. 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 hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest hexastock-application hexastock-application hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest->hexastock-application hexastock-adapters-outbound-market hexastock-adapters-outbound-market hexastock-adapters-outbound-market->hexastock-application hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa->hexastock-application hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb->hexastock-application hexastock-domain hexastock-domain hexastock-application->hexastock-domain hexastock-bootstrap hexastock-bootstrap hexastock-bootstrap->hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest hexastock-bootstrap->hexastock-adapters-outbound-market hexastock-bootstrap->hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa hexastock-bootstrap->hexastock-adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb hexastock-bootstrap->hexastock-application hexastock-bootstrap->hexastock-domain

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.

26 modules, with 57 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 2 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock2 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.config3 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.annotation4 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.exception5 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model6 doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-07.analyze_jobs7 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.money8 doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-079 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.market10 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.transaction11 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.entity12 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.document13 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.portfolio14 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in.webmodel15 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.mapper16 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.springdatarepository17 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.mapper18 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.springdatarepository19 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.in20 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.out21 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in22 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.repository23 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.repository24 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.rest25 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.service26 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.config
1 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock
2 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.config
3 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.annotation
4 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.exception
5 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model
6 doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-07.analyze_jobs
7 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.money2
8 doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-071
9 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.market11
10 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.transaction1135
11 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.entity2
12 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.document1
13 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.portfolio41041
14 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in.webmodel13
15 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.mapper143
16 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.springdatarepository2
17 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.mapper143
18 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.springdatarepository1
19 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.in2316
20 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.out213
21 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in11223106
22 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.repository1322
23 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.repository1322
24 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.rest63
25 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.service2318611
26 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.config1163
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock2 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.config3 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.annotation4 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.exception5 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model6 doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-07.analyze_jobs7 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.money8 doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-079 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.market10 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.transaction11 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.entity12 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.document13 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.portfolio14 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in.webmodel15 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.mapper16 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.springdatarepository17 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.mapper18 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.springdatarepository19 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.in20 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.out21 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in22 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.repository23 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.repository24 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.rest25 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.service26 cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.configcat.gencat.agaur.hexastock1cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.config2cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.annotation3cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.exception4cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model5doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-07.analyze_jobs6cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.money7doc.presentations.defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal.analysis.senior-software-jobs-2026-078cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.market9cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.transaction10cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.entity11cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.document12cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.model.portfolio13cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in.webmodel14cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.mapper15cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.springdatarepository16cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.mapper17cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.springdatarepository18cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.in19cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.port.out20cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.in21cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.jpa.repository22cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.persistence.mongodb.repository23cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.adapter.out.rest24cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.application.service25cat.gencat.agaur.hexastock.config262111113521410411314321431231621311223106132213226323186111163

At a glance — Code Health · 74% · Adequate · gated by X5 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 86% · Strong ·

At a glance — Maturity · 59% · Adequate · gated by M4 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 36% · Weak · gated by P2, P3, P8 ·

At a glance — Security · 97% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 54% · Adequate · gated by DM7 ·

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 — Injection4High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures2High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration2Medium

Roadmap

First, implement structured observability by adopting SLF4J with JSON encoding and establishing health checks across all modules. Second, enforce repository granularity by aligning repositories with aggregate roots to protect invariants, and replace Hibernate's auto-DDL with versioned migration tools like Flyway or Liquibase for safe schema evolution. Finally, correct documentation drift to match the current codebase and maintain a changelog to track release history accurately.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Adopt SLF4J (with a Logback or Log4j2 JSON encoder) and log at meaningful points in the modules you run.+6.4 ptsMediumObservability
Define repositories per aggregate root and keep the query handle inside them; reach child entities through their root so invariants can't be bypassed.+3.7 ptsMediumRepository granularity
Replace Hibernate ddl-auto with Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate` so the production schema can evolve safely and reproducibly.+3.6 ptsMediumSchema migrations
Reconcile the README with reality: doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `DDD`, but `doc/DDD` does not exist; doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `Remove`, but `doc/Remove` does not exist; doc/diagrams/README.md names `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml`, but no file or folder `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml` exists; doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java` does not exist; doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java`, but `doc/domain-review/application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java` does not exist.+3.1 ptsMediumDocumentation accuracy
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.+2.3 ptsMediumRelease Hygiene
Resolve the 58 No direct assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with PortfolioTradingRestIntegrationTest.java (14), PortfolioRestControllerTest.java (12), PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java (12).+2.2 ptsMediumTest Quality
Give each aggregate one way in that can refuse — a guarded constructor, value-object parameters that validate themselves, or a private constructor behind a factory that returns a failure.+1.7 ptsMediumConstructible invalid state
Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.+1.5 ptsMediumRich vs anemic model

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 26 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 4% slop · 31% mixed · 65% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED2.7SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED6.9MixedIaC & Container Security: Medium IaC: REDACTED
doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py7.1MixedCyclomatic Complexity: analyze_jobs.main (cyclomatic 32)
adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java7.1MixedTest Quality: No assertions: createAndGetById_roundTrip
adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java7.1MixedTest Quality: No assertions: createAndGetById_roundTrip
adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java7.2MixedTest Quality: No assertions: depositRoundTrip
adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java7.2MixedTest Quality: No assertions: depositRoundTrip
REDACTED7.2MixedSecrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED
adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/LotMapper.java7.8MixedCode Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)
doc/architecture/adr/ADR-007-domain-module-zero-framework-dependencies.md8.0Near-cleanADR Conformance: ADR not followed: ADR-007: Keep the domain module free of all framework dependencies
doc/architecture/adr/ADR-015-explicit-bean-wiring-via-configuration.md8.0Near-cleanADR Conformance: ADR not followed: ADR-015: Wire application services explicitly via @Configuration beans
domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/PurchaseTransaction.java8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)
adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/webmodel/TransactionDTO.java8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (7 lines × 2)
adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/TransactionMapper.java8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (6 lines × 2)
adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/TransactionDocumentMapper.java8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (6 lines × 2)
domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/DepositTransaction.java8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)
adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestController.java8.5Near-cleanCohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: PortfolioRestController (LCOM4 5)
adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java9.0Near-cleanTest Quality: No direct assertions: returns200WithPortfolioData
bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java9.0Near-cleanTest Quality: No direct assertions: getHoldings_emptyAfterCreation
bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioTradingRestIntegrationTest.java9.0Near-cleanTest Quality: No direct assertions: endToEnd_depositBuySellWithdraw

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 — 7

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 — 45

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 — 108

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

Could not be resolved — 17

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. 66 of 71 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — 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 — 71 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D7D9D10D13D15D17D19D20D21D25D26D27D28D29D31D34D35D44AX1AX10AX2AX3AX4AX6DM1DM11DM4DM5DM7DM8DM9IC1M1M2M3M4P1P11P2P3P4P6P7P8X1X12X13X14X15X16X18X19X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X5

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, 151 of 160 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 · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a162de-24ee-75ad-a4e9-489979364ad5.

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.

  • D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.java) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
  • D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.java) and this repository declares a JVM test suite (repository root, Maven), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 8 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 2 dependency(ies) and leaving 43 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
  • 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 (5 contributor(s) across 492 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 99% of the history; the other 4 hold 0.2% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is an ADMISSION gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (application/pom.xml), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here. D22 DOES collect the public API of every language in this tree, and admits a project only when its manifest makes that ecosystem's publication act in a form the marker recognises — so what is missing is not a collector but an admission rule for the publication act this repository makes, if it makes one. The remedy is a better discriminator for that marker — not a collector, and no change to the scan image can close it. The marker's rules are measured to refuse applications, so one refused repository is the rule working as calibrated; several are the evidence that it is too strict.
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — 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. Osv: osv-scanner exited 127 with no findings — dependency CVEs were not measured. 'osv-scanner' exited 127 and produced no findings, and that exit code has no documented repo-side meaning — so this run measured nothing, and nothing here is a statement about the repository.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Osv: osv-scanner exited 127 with no findings — dependency CVEs were not measured. 'osv-scanner' exited 127 and produced no findings, and that exit code has no documented repo-side meaning — so this run measured nothing, and nothing here is a statement about the repository.
  • 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. Render strategy: boot via DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — mysql Pulling mongo Pulling mysql Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mongo Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: mysql Pulling mongo Pulling mysql Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mongo Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped.
  • C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
  • C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
  • C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
  • C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Java, Python is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy — 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. 5 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 45.
  • S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D7 Architectural Integrity: Layering is checked against detected/declared rules — an architecture whose boundaries live in convention or in code review, not in a rule a scanner can read, is not enforced here.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
  • D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
  • D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
  • D25 ADR Conformance: ADR conformance is the LLM-scored fraction of sampled code that follows recorded decisions — it checks the decisions that were written down and the slices it sampled, not unrecorded rules or the whole tree.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • 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").
  • D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • DM4 Rich vs anemic model: Behaviour is detected as state mutation inside a method body — a method that enforces an invariant by validating-and-throwing without mutating reads as a query, and mutation delegated through an interface the scan can't resolve isn't credited; entities with zero public properties still drop out of the population. It detects that state changes, not whether the rule is correct.
  • 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 (5): D19, D20, D21, D25, 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 Complexity9.0 / 10Stronggated by 2 serious findings✓ 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 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

2 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was analyze_jobs.main at 32.

analyze_jobs.main (cyclomatic 32)doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:259
analyze_jobs.load_offers (cyclomatic 18)doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:159

What to do

  1. Bring the 2 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with analyze_jobs.main (cyclomatic 32), analyze_jobs.load_offers (cyclomatic 18). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 2 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.0 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.

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

D2 · Cognitive Complexity8.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

2 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was analyze_jobs.main at 44.

analyze_jobs.main (cognitive 44)doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:259
analyze_jobs.load_offers (cognitive 26)doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:159

What to do

  1. Bring the 2 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with analyze_jobs.main (cognitive 44), analyze_jobs.load_offers (cognitive 26). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 2 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 8.7 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.

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 Duplication9.5 / 10Stronggated by 8 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 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

8 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×4domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/PurchaseTransaction.java:31
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×2adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/TransactionMapper.java:30
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2)adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/webmodel/TransactionDTO.java:35
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2)doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:351

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with LotMapper.java (2), PurchaseTransaction.java, DepositTransaction.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with TransactionMapper.java, TransactionDocumentMapper.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with TransactionDTO.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

D5 · Coupling8.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

7 production modules (Maven), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 1 module(s) off the main sequence.

Off the main sequence: hexastock-domain

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

1 of 12 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: PortfolioRestController (LCOM4 5)adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestController.java:50

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with PortfolioRestController.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Enforce Cohesion (LCOM4) in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

All 11 mechanizable ADR(s) are enforced: 9 by analyzers, 2 by tests. Dependency cycles not checked (no project-reference graph; where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d7_recommendation.md.

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

216 test methods: 216 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality8.8 / 10Strong✓ 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 8.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 skipped, 76 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 216 tests (2 harness-style project(s) excluded from the assertion penalty).

No assertions: createAndGetById_roundTrip · ×18adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:58
No direct assertions: returns200WithPortfolioData · ×58adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:97

What to do

  1. Resolve the 58 No direct assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with PortfolioTradingRestIntegrationTest.java (14), PortfolioRestControllerTest.java (12), PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java (12). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (58 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 18 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java (5), MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java (5), JpaTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 warning-level).

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

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

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

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

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

REDACTED scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_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 Debt10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 deducted task-comment markers across 5644 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d17_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 is a strong project overview that links to the accompanying technical book (BOOK-HOME) as the long-form reference. The architecture and design documentation are well organized into a dedicated directory of markdown files (72+), covering topics such as PlantUML diagram pipeline, requirement-traceability model, ADRs, and an institutional acknowledgments document. Each documented directory is self-contained: README.md for the repository root, doc/diagrams/README.md for diagrams, doc/tutorial/README.md for a tutorial, and so on — all are clearly scoped to their own directories. The documentation is excellent: the READMEs and architecture/Docs markdown files are well written with a clear overview (Portfolio and Transaction Aggregates in DDD), detailed domain context, concrete design decisions (e.g. handling Lots with zero remaining quantity), paired with comparative analysis of four architectural styles (DDD, Hexagonal, Onion, Clean) as well as an exhaustive architecture transformation program covering executive summary, strategic impact, engineering foundation, industry validation, and a full use-case walk-through. The document is comprehensive and well-structured. HexaStock's documentation is exemplary in scope and structure: the repository root contains seven READMEs (one for each module) that describe what they are for and how to use their contents; there are 102 architecture/design documents covering every aspect of the project. The content is well-organized with a clear versioning line, an overview section explaining the specification-first discipline, a five-category specification landscape table, live demos showing domain model, unit tests, integration with testcontainers, and REST/Swagger, plus a detailed DDD review that is itself a living document. A dual-license license page (Apache 2.0 for source code, CC BY-NC 4.0 for the book) is present. This repository's documentation is excellent — it contains 7 README files plus 102 architecture/design markdown docs (the first two of which are shown), covering concurrency control with both pessimistic locking and optimistic retries for the PortfolioPort aggregate. The tutorial 'Concurrency Control: Pessimistic Locking and Optimistic Concurrency' is a textbook-style reference document, beginning with an explicit business problem ('lost updates, double spending, negative balances') and a two-strategy framing before diving into each adapter's code path, tests, and rationale; the outline lists every visible section. The high quality is evident from the thoroughness of the content rather than any defect.

Documentation: no project overview · ×2README.md

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).

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

D20 · ADR QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

Evaluated 16 ADR(s) individually; mean quality 9.7/10 (consistently complete and clear). 0 flagged with a specific gap.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d20_recommendation.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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D25 · ADR ConformanceAdequategated by 2 critical findings◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

10 conform / 2 violate across 16 ADRs.

ADR not followed: ADR-007: Keep the domain module free of all framework dependencies · ×2doc/architecture/adr/ADR-007-domain-module-zero-framework-dependencies.md

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 ADR not followed finding(s) in ADR Conformance — start with ADR-007-domain-module-zero-framework-dependencies.md, ADR-015-explicit-bean-wiring-via-configuration.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d25_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.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 8 build units (Maven) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

D27 · Navigability9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

87 % of calls cross a namespace and 16 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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: REDACTED 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. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)10.0 / 10Adequategated by 4 critical findings○ Nothing flagged

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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

4 finding(s): 0 critical, 4 high, 0 medium, 0 low. 4 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 3 file(s) — `doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/src/generate_derived_materials.sh` (lines 60–64, lines 66–70), `doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/src/generate_derived_materials_trajectoria.sh` (lines 63–67, lines 69–73), `mvnw` (line 86, line 121, line 131, …) — 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

What to do

  1. No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 4 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 (4 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.8 / 10Stronggated by 2 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D34 · Knowledge Freshness9.6 / 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 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 of 32 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepository.java. Counted over 32 of the 93 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned file · ×2adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepository.java:1
Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 1 platform declaration(s) and 11 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

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 composition5.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

DM1 · Aggregate boundaries10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates reference each other by identity (id) rather than by direct object reference — the core DDD consistency-boundary rule.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): aggregate roots identified by convention; each aggregate field checked for direct references to other aggregates versus id-only. Deterministic, DDD-native.

Coverage: Population: aggregate roots identified by AggregateRoot/IAggregateRoot base/interface NAME convention; reference-by-identity then checked exhaustively within that set — a root not using those names is invisible.

DM11 · Constructible invalid state6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether an aggregate can be constructed in a state its own rules forbid — a public constructor that takes a raw primitive, stores it, and validates nothing, with no factory beside it. A constructor taking only value objects is not counted: each parameter has already validated itself.

Method: Neutral surface (DDD-gated): each non-abstract entity/aggregate checked for a PUBLIC constructor taking at least one RAW PRIMITIVE parameter whose body contains no guard token (throw / Guard. / Ensure. / ArgumentException / CheckRule), on a type that also offers no static Create/Of/From/New factory. A constructor taking only value objects is never charged -- measured: 64 of 87 unguarded public constructors on the C# corpus take value objects only, so ignoring parameter types would be 73% false positives. One finding per entity. Deterministic.

  • `Portfolio`'s public constructor takes `ownerName` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `Portfolio` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse. — domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java:74
  • `HoldingJpaEntity`'s public constructor takes `id`, `ticker` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `HoldingJpaEntity` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse. — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/entity/HoldingJpaEntity.java:30
  • `LotJpaEntity`'s public constructor takes `id`, `initialStocks`, `quantity` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `LotJpaEntity` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse. — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/entity/LotJpaEntity.java:22
  • `PortfolioJpaEntity`'s public constructor takes `id`, `ownerName` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `PortfolioJpaEntity` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse. — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/entity/PortfolioJpaEntity.java:84

What to do

  • Give each aggregate one way in that can refuse — a guarded constructor, value-object parameters that validate themselves, or a private constructor behind a factory that returns a failure.
DM4 · Rich vs anemic model6.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates/entities carry the behaviour that protects their invariants, rather than being data bags driven by external services.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): entity method BODIES classified mutator-vs-query — only methods that mutate the entity's own declared state count as invariant-protecting behaviour, so a getter/passthrough doesn't rescue an anemic class. Deterministic, exhaustive over domain-layer entities.

Coverage: Population: entities by name/base convention; rich-vs-anemic judged by classifying each method body mutator-vs-query — logic-bearing domain types outside the convention are invisible.

  • `Holding` is an aggregate/entity with 3 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Holding.java:16

What to do

  • Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.
DM5 · Encapsulated state10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether entities protect their state — private/init-only setters, and collections handed out as read-only views rather than the mutable backing collection — instead of exposing writable state that bypasses invariants. Softened when a rehydration framework (Marten/EF) is present.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): entities scanned for publicly writable state — public setters, and (C#/VB) own mutable collections handed out through an auto-property, a public field or a bare-field expression getter, where a computed/copying getter is never charged. One finding per entity; score softened when Marten/EF rehydration frameworks present. Deterministic, framework-aware.

Coverage: Population: entities by convention; encapsulation (setter shape) checked exhaustively within the set.

DM7 · Repository granularity1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether repositories are per aggregate root (not per child entity) and keep the persistence query handle behind the contract, so the root's invariants can't be bypassed.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): repository abstraction detection; repositories over non-aggregate-root entities flagged, and (C#/VB) repository INTERFACES whose members return a live persistence query handle (IQueryable/DbSet/IMongoQueryable) — implementations and specification evaluators are out of population by design, since composing a query internally is what an implementation is for. Deterministic, DDD-native.

Coverage: Population: repositories + aggregate roots by NAME convention; per-root repository rule checked within the set.

  • `JpaPortfolioSpringDataRepository` is a repository over `PortfolioJpaEntity`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `PortfolioJpaEntity` through its owning aggregate instead. — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/springdatarepository/JpaPortfolioSpringDataRepository.java:31
  • `JpaTransactionSpringDataRepository` is a repository over `TransactionJpaEntity`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `TransactionJpaEntity` through its owning aggregate instead. — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/springdatarepository/JpaTransactionSpringDataRepository.java:27

What to do

  • Define repositories per aggregate root and keep the query handle inside them; reach child entities through their root so invariants can't be bypassed.
DM8 · Value-object opportunities10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether clusters of primitives that travel together (a missing value object) are extracted — a low-weight suggestion, LLM-confirmed when configured.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): primitive parameter clusters recurring three or more times across signatures extracted, then confirmed by language model when configured. Advisory, low-weight.

DM9 · Scattered domain decisions10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether one domain rule is decided — or one measurement produced — in more than one place, rather than living on the type that owns it.

Method: Neutral body surface plus Roslyn (DDD-gated), two arms. DECISION (Roslyn only): a predicate over a domain type's members judged in two or more types, where none of those decisions live on the owning type — operands of comparisons and relational property patterns only, so a member merely passed as an argument is not judged. DERIVATION: a plain all-numeric carrier of ≥2 members, with no base type and exactly one constructor, CONSTRUCTED as the result of a method (returned or assigned, never inline as an argument) in two or more types other than its own — the same measurement produced twice, which centralising the judgement does not fix. DERIVATION runs on every language whose frontend declares the produced-or-passed fact per construction (Roslyn and the Java sidecar today); a target with only the derivation arm carries an engine gap naming the decision arm as not assessed, and a frontend that declares nothing keeps the dimension not measured rather than clean. Single-member rules, test code and generated code are out of population for both. Advisory.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords, in this repository's Java: methods that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant or do nothing, dead `if (false)` branches, and skeleton classes most of whose methods are holes.

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

M1 · Documentation (README)8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a README to the 7 of 7 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation8.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Grow the ADR log (currently 17) — reach 20 to raise the maturity tier; document significant decisions as they're made.
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 accuracy0.0 / 10Critical◐ 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.

  • doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `DDD`, but `doc/DDD` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/BOOK-HOME.md:29
  • doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `Remove`, but `doc/Remove` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/BOOK-HOME.md:30
  • doc/diagrams/README.md names `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml`, but no file or folder `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml` exists. 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. — doc/diagrams/README.md:52
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:52
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java`, but `doc/domain-review/application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:103
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Holding.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Holding.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:445
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/ShareQuantity.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/ShareQuantity.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:604
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Money.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Money.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:605
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Price.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Price.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:606
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/market/Ticker.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/market/Ticker.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:607
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/PortfolioId.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/PortfolioId.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:608
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/HoldingId.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/HoldingId.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:609
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/LotId.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/LotId.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:610
  • doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Lot.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Lot.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:621
  • doc/tutorial/DDD-Hexagonal-exercise.md documents the environment variable `SPECIFIC_ID`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/DDD-Hexagonal-exercise.md:107
  • doc/tutorial/portfolioReporting/HOLDINGS-PERFORMANCE-AT-SCALE.md documents the environment variable `HALF_EVEN`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/portfolioReporting/HOLDINGS-PERFORMANCE-AT-SCALE.md:333
  • doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Portfolio.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Portfolio.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:375
  • doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Holding.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Holding.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:376
  • doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Lot.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Lot.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:377
  • doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SellResult.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SellResult.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:378
  • doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SettlementAwareSellTest.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SettlementAwareSellTest.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:382
  • doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/SettlementSellIntegrationTest.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/SettlementSellIntegrationTest.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:383
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md links to `../../../.gitbook/assets/HexaStock`, but `.gitbook/assets/HexaStock` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:317
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md links to `../../DDD`, but `doc/DDD` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:319
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md links to `../../Remove`, but `doc/Remove` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:1253
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/specification/SpecificationRef.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/specification/SpecificationRef.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:1343
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/PortfolioTest.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/PortfolioTest.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:1348
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/MoneyTest.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/MoneyTest.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:1350
  • doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md names `ShareQuantityTest.java`, but no file or folder `ShareQuantityTest.java` exists. 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. — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:1350
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `specs/`, but `doc/tutorial/watchlists/specs` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:9
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `../../architecture/adr/ADR-016-watchlists-bounded-context.md`, but `doc/architecture/adr/ADR-016-watchlists-bounded-context.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:10
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `../../architecture/adr/ADR-017-cqrs-pragmatic-separation-for-market-sentinel.md`, but `doc/architecture/adr/ADR-017-cqrs-pragmatic-separation-for-market-sentinel.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:10
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `../../architecture/adr/ADR-018-watchlist-list-of-alertentry-instead-of-map.md`, but `doc/architecture/adr/ADR-018-watchlist-list-of-alertentry-instead-of-map.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:10
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `../../architecture/adr/ADR-019-scheduler-as-driving-adapter.md`, but `doc/architecture/adr/ADR-019-scheduler-as-driving-adapter.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:10
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `../../architecture/adr/ADR-020-notification-outbound-port.md`, but `doc/architecture/adr/ADR-020-notification-outbound-port.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:10
  • doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md links to `../../architecture/adr/ADR-021-progressive-level-roadmap-for-watchlists.md`, but `doc/architecture/adr/ADR-021-progressive-level-roadmap-for-watchlists.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/tutorial/watchlists/MARKET-SENTINEL-ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.md:10
  • doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/output/materials-orals-canonics-20-minuts.md names `guió-oral-20-minuts.md`, but no file or folder `guió-oral-20-minuts.md` exists. 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. — doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/output/materials-orals-canonics-20-minuts.md:11
  • sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/sell-stocks-spec.md links to `error-contract.md`, but `sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/error-contract.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/sell-stocks-spec.md:4
  • sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/sell-stocks-spec.md names `error-contract.md`, but no file or folder `error-contract.md` exists. 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. — sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/sell-stocks-spec.md:4
  • sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/sell-stocks-spec.md links to `domain-model.md`, but `sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/domain-model.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — sell-stocks-domain-kata/docs/self-paced-assignments/spec/sell-stocks-spec.md:8

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `DDD`, but `doc/DDD` does not exist; doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `Remove`, but `doc/Remove` does not exist; doc/diagrams/README.md names `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml`, but no file or folder `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml` exists; doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java` does not exist; doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java`, but `doc/domain-review/application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java` does not exist.
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.

P11 · BDD / executable specs10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — Whether behaviour is captured as executable Gherkin specifications (a plus for shared understanding) — only assessed when a BDD framework is present.

Method: Filesystem scan: BDD framework presence (SpecFlow, Gherkin files) when a project references a BDD tool. Exhaustive, deterministic.

P2 · Observability0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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.

  • No logging call was found in the 95 Python, JVM production file(s) this check read across 8 module(s). Each was searched for its ecosystem's logging libraries (JVM: SLF4J, Log4j2, java.util.logging, Logback, kotlin-logging, scala-logging; Python: logging, structlog, loguru) and for a call on a receiver named `log`/`logger` (or ending in `Logger`/`_logger`) with a level verb. It cannot see logging through a repo-local wrapper named otherwise, or in source it did not read — this is 'no logging found by this walk', not a verdict that nothing here logs. If it is right, production issues will be hard to diagnose.

What to do

  • Adopt SLF4J (with a Logback or Log4j2 JSON encoder) and log at meaningful points in the modules you run.
  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-java or Micrometer) and a health-check endpoint (Spring Boot Actuator's /actuator/health, or a /health route) for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 1938 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

  • Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

  • No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

What to do

  • Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

P8 · Schema migrations3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether database schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than being auto-created from the model at startup.

Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage; off .NET, a file scan of dependency manifests, migration histories (Flyway, Liquibase, Alembic, Django, Rails, Prisma, TypeORM, Knex/Sequelize, golang-migrate, goose, Laravel, Doctrine, Diesel/sqlx) and schema auto-create in production source or config. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • Hibernate ddl-auto builds the schema from the model at startup and keeps no migration history, so there is no reviewed, repeatable upgrade path for an existing production database — a renamed column is dropped and re-added rather than migrated. Adopt Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate`, so every schema change is a versioned file applied the same way in every environment. — bootstrap/REDACTED:12

What to do

  • Replace Hibernate ddl-auto with Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate` so the production schema can evolve safely and reproducibly.
X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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 stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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.

X20 · Mistyped argument guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `NullPointerException` (Java, Kotlin, Scala), `ArgumentError.notNull` (Dart) or `ArgumentNullException` (F#'s `nullArg`) tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

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

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 unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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 an enhanced `for` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is iterating invalidates the fail-fast iterator it is holding, so the next `next()` throws `ConcurrentModificationException` and the remaining elements are never seen. Whether a `for` loop leaves the `dict`, `set` or `deque` it is walking alone — CPython's iterators over those check that the collection has not changed size since the loop began, so a body that removes from (or empties) the very collection the loop is walking makes the next step raise `RuntimeError: dictionary changed size during iteration` 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 handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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.

X5 · Nullable reference types2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether Java packages are null-marked and not undermined by heavy nullness suppression — a package under `@NullMarked` (or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, or a NullAway/Checker Framework configuration naming it) makes an unannotated reference exclude null, and `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")`, `("nullness")`, `("null")` and `castToNonNull(…)` are what silence it.

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

  • 0/24 of this repository's Java package directories are under a non-null default: a `package-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked` (JSpecify) or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, `@DefaultQualifier(NonNull.class)`; a `module-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked`; every type in it `@NullMarked`; or a build that runs NullAway with the package in `AnnotatedPackages`, or the Checker Framework's `NullnessChecker`. Elsewhere every reference admits null and no checker warns on the dereference that throws a `NullPointerException`.

What to do

  • Declare the default where Java declares it: `@NullMarked` (org.jspecify.annotations) in each package's `package-info.java`, or once in `module-info.java`, and run NullAway (Error Prone) or the Checker Framework so the declaration is enforced. Then annotate the real exceptions `@Nullable` and resolve the suppressions rather than adding to them: a `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")` or `castToNonNull(x)` on a value the checker could show to be null is a `NullPointerException` waiting for the path that makes it true — where the value genuinely cannot be null, say something the checker can see instead (a null check, `Objects.requireNonNull`, a non-null field initialised in the constructor).

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 Health74%Adequate — gated by X5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture86%StrongSolid.
Maturity59%Adequate — gated by M4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness36%Weak — gated by P2, P3, P8Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security97%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Domain Modelling54%Adequate — gated by DM7Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Unscored — 2 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — 1 observation(s) recorded · The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release). Build integrity and workflow-token hygiene are reported below: they describe what the CI runs and the token it runs with, neither of which is affected by whether the pipeline ships an artifact.
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — 1 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 54 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — mysql Pulling mongo Pulling mysql Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mongo Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: mysql Pulling mongo Pulling mysql Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mongo Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
  • C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .java suite was found but not re-run
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 8 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 2 dependency(ies) and leaving 43 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
  • D14 License Compliance — Not scored — this repository's 2 declared JVM dependency coordinate(s) were read from its 8 Maven/Gradle manifest(s), but Maven Central could not be asked for the licence of 2 of them (HTTP 429 Too Many Requests from https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/tngtech/archunit/archunit-junit5/1.3.0/archunit-junit5-1.3.0.pom), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
  • D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
  • D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Aggregate roots were found in only one source directory (model), which is a layered codebase, not two contexts. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Scanner failed to run — not a clean result
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies — Scanner failed to run — not a clean result
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
  • DM10 One transaction, one aggregate — no repository writes detected — no operation to judge against the one-aggregate rule
  • DM12 Ambient inputs in the domain — no domain-layer types detected — ambient-input check not applicable
  • DM2 Strongly-typed ids — no id-bearing domain types detected — strongly-typed-id adoption not assessable
  • DM3 Integration-event coupling — no integration events detected — coupling check not applicable
  • DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary — no domain-layer types detected — domain↔infrastructure boundary check not applicable
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `@Benchmark` in a Java, Kotlin or Scala file importing JMH or kotlinx-benchmark, Jetpack Benchmark's `measureRepeated` in a file importing androidx.benchmark, or JMH/kotlinx-benchmark/androidx.benchmark in a pom.xml, Gradle or sbt build, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Java code has 5,814 production line(s), 0 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
  • PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
  • S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Java and Python were read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Java request off Android takes no token: it is cancelled through the handle it returns (Future.cancel, Call.cancel, a Disposable), ambiently (io.grpc.Context) or by interrupting its thread, not through a parameter; a Python request takes no token: asyncio cancels the task and trio or anyio the scope that made it, from outside the call, and requests, httpx, aiohttp and gRPC take a timeout, not a cancellation
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X4 Structured logging — This check asks whether log calls keep a message's values apart from its text, which needs a logger that can carry them as fields. This repository's Java was read, and it logs through none that an assembled message defeats: java.util.logging's level methods, log4j 1, commons-logging, JBoss Logging and Flogger take one finished message (as log4net does in C#), or it makes no call through a named logger at all. Calls made through SLF4J or log4j 2 (`org.slf4j.Logger`, `org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger`, Lombok's `@Slf4j`) would be judged.
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 7 finding(s)
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D25 · ADR Conformance · ADR not followed · ×2
  • ADR not followed: ADR-007: Keep the domain module free of all framework dependencies doc/architecture/adr/ADR-007-domain-module-zero-framework-dependencies.md — The summary exposes no dependency declarations, so it cannot confirm or contradict the zero-framework-dependency rule. (doc/architecture/adr/ADR-007-domain-module-zero-framework-dependencies.md)
  • ADR not followed: ADR-015: Wire application services explicitly via @Configuration beans doc/architecture/adr/ADR-015-explicit-bean-wiring-via-configuration.md — @Autowired PortfolioPort ... @Autowired TransactionPort in SpringAppConfig already wire application services, contradicting the explicit-bean-wiring-only decision. (doc/architecture/adr/ADR-015-explicit-bean-wiring-via-configuration.md)
D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
Serious — 45 finding(s)
D10 · Test Quality · No assertions · ×18
  • No assertions: createAndGetById_roundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:58 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: getAllPortfolios_returnsAll adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:60 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: getPortfolioById_nonexistent_returnsEmpty adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:61 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: portfolioWithHoldingsAndLots_roundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:62 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: savePortfolio_updatesBalance adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:59 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: depositRoundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:51 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: purchaseRoundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:52 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: saleRoundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:53 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: unknownPortfolio_returnsEmptyList adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/repository/JpaTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:54 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: createAndGetById_roundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:44 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: getAllPortfolios_returnsAll adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:46 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: getPortfolioById_nonexistent_returnsEmpty adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:47 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: portfolioWithHoldingsAndLots_roundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:48 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: savePortfolio_updatesBalance adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepositoryContractTest.java:45 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: depositRoundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:44 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: purchaseRoundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:45 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: saleRoundTrip adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:46 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: unknownPortfolio_returnsEmptyList adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoTransactionRepositoryContractTest.java:47 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/PurchaseTransaction.java:31 — domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/PurchaseTransaction.java:31-39 | domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/SaleTransaction.java:32-40 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/PurchaseTransaction.java:31` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/SaleTransaction.java:29` calls `requireNonNull` and `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/PurchaseTransaction.java:28` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/DepositTransaction.java:23 — domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/DepositTransaction.java:23-31 | domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/transaction/WithdrawalTransaction.java:22-30 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/LotMapper.java:13 — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/LotMapper.java:13-21 | adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/LotDocumentMapper.java:14-22 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/LotMapper.java:23 — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/LotMapper.java:23-31 | adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/LotDocumentMapper.java:24-32 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
DM11 · Constructible invalid state · Constructible in an invalid state · ×4
  • Constructible in an invalid state: Portfolio domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java:74 — `Portfolio`'s public constructor takes `ownerName` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `Portfolio` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse.
  • Constructible in an invalid state: HoldingJpaEntity adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/entity/HoldingJpaEntity.java:30 — `HoldingJpaEntity`'s public constructor takes `id`, `ticker` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `HoldingJpaEntity` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse.
  • Constructible in an invalid state: LotJpaEntity adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/entity/LotJpaEntity.java:22 — `LotJpaEntity`'s public constructor takes `id`, `initialStocks`, `quantity` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `LotJpaEntity` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse.
  • Constructible in an invalid state: PortfolioJpaEntity adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/entity/PortfolioJpaEntity.java:84 — `PortfolioJpaEntity`'s public constructor takes `id`, `ownerName` as raw primitives, and neither of the two things that would make that safe was found. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: for VALIDATION, the constructor body was scanned for `throw`, `Guard.`, `Ensure.`, `ArgumentNullException`, `ArgumentException`, `CheckRule` or `Requires.` — a guard reached through a helper method those tokens do not name is not seen; for a FACTORY, only this type's OWN static members were read, and only names beginning `Create`, `Of`, `From`, `New` or `Build` — one inherited from a base type, one on a companion builder, or one called `Parse`, `Make` or `Rehydrate` is not seen. If either exists, this row is wrong. If neither does, a caller can build a `PortfolioJpaEntity` that breaks the rules it exists to enforce, and every rule downstream then has to cope with a state the model said was impossible. Guard in the constructor, take value objects that validate themselves, or make the constructor private behind a `Create` that can refuse.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/TransactionMapper.java:30 — adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/TransactionMapper.java:30-35 | adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/mapper/TransactionMapper.java:39-44 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/TransactionDocumentMapper.java:36 — adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/TransactionDocumentMapper.java:36-41 | adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/TransactionDocumentMapper.java:45-50 — 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.
DM7 · Repository granularity · Repository for a non-root entity · ×2
  • Repository for a non-root entity: JpaPortfolioSpringDataRepository → PortfolioJpaEntity adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/springdatarepository/JpaPortfolioSpringDataRepository.java:31 — `JpaPortfolioSpringDataRepository` is a repository over `PortfolioJpaEntity`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `PortfolioJpaEntity` through its owning aggregate instead.
  • Repository for a non-root entity: JpaTransactionSpringDataRepository → TransactionJpaEntity adapters-outbound-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/jpa/springdatarepository/JpaTransactionSpringDataRepository.java:27 — `JpaTransactionSpringDataRepository` is a repository over `TransactionJpaEntity`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `TransactionJpaEntity` through its owning aggregate instead.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · analyze_jobs.main (cyclomatic 32) · ×1
  • analyze_jobs.main (cyclomatic 32) doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:259 — analyze_jobs.main has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · analyze_jobs.load_offers (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • analyze_jobs.load_offers (cyclomatic 18) doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:159 — analyze_jobs.load_offers has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · analyze_jobs.main (cognitive 44) · ×1
  • analyze_jobs.main (cognitive 44) doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:259 — analyze_jobs.main has cognitive complexity 44 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 14 (22 pts), if/else 7 (16 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · analyze_jobs.load_offers (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • analyze_jobs.load_offers (cognitive 26) doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:159 — analyze_jobs.load_offers has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 12 (18 pts), boolean chains 3, if/else 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/webmodel/TransactionDTO.java:35 — adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/webmodel/TransactionDTO.java:35-41 | adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/mapper/TransactionDocumentMapper.java:62-68 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/webmodel/TransactionDTO.java:35` 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 (5 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:351 — doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:351-355 | doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:389-393 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `doc/presentations/defensa-placa-permanent-dsi-ports-sortida-hexagonal/analysis/senior-software-jobs-2026-07/analyze_jobs.py:351` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1
  • Off the main sequence: hexastock-domain — hexastock-domain: abstractness 0.03, instability 0.00, distance 0.97 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×1
  • Low cohesion: PortfolioRestController (LCOM4 5) adapters-inbound-rest/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestController.java:50 — PortfolioRestController's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
DM4 · Rich vs anemic model · Anemic entity · ×1
  • Anemic entity: Holding domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Holding.java:16 — `Holding` is an aggregate/entity with 3 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Coverage collected but not gated · ×1
  • Coverage collected but not gated — CI collects a coverage report but no step enforces a minimum — coverage could halve and CI stays green. Add a step that fails the build when coverage drops below a floor (your coverage tool's minimum-threshold flag, or a coverage-gate action) so the number guards something. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: this repository's CI files AND its coverage configuration — the well-known coverage and test-runner config files, read at the repository root and inside workspace package directories two levels down, so a floor declared beside the tests rather than in the pipeline is credited — matched against the threshold settings this check knows by name. A floor set in your coverage service's web UI rather than in a committed file, or under a setting whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
P2 · Observability · No structured logging · ×1
  • No structured logging — No logging call was found in the 95 Python, JVM production file(s) this check read across 8 module(s). Each was searched for its ecosystem's logging libraries (JVM: SLF4J, Log4j2, java.util.logging, Logback, kotlin-logging, scala-logging; Python: logging, structlog, loguru) and for a call on a receiver named `log`/`logger` (or ending in `Logger`/`_logger`) with a level verb. It cannot see logging through a repo-local wrapper named otherwise, or in source it did not read — this is 'no logging found by this walk', not a verdict that nothing here logs. If it is right, production issues will be hard to diagnose.
P8 · Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto (no migration path) · ×1
  • Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto (no migration path) bootstrap/REDACTED:12 — Hibernate ddl-auto builds the schema from the model at startup and keeps no migration history, so there is no reviewed, repeatable upgrade path for an existing production database — a renamed column is dropped and re-added rather than migrated. Adopt Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate`, so every schema change is a versioned file applied the same way in every environment.
Minor — 108 finding(s)
D10 · Test Quality · No direct assertions · ×58
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithPortfolioData adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:97 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns404WhenNotFound adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:112 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithEmptyList adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:147 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithList adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:133 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns404WhenNotFound adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:181 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns409WhenInsufficientFunds adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:218 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns409WhenInsufficientFunds adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:256 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithSaleResponse adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:278 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns404WhenHoldingNotFound adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:310 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns409WhenConflictQuantity adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:297 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithTransactions adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:332 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithHoldings adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioRestControllerTest.java:375 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns200WithStockPrice adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/StockRestControllerTest.java:39 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns400ForInvalidTicker adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/StockRestControllerTest.java:65 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: returns503WhenExternalApiFails adapters-inbound-rest/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/StockRestControllerTest.java:53 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 15 of 20 tests in `hexastock-adapters-inbound-rest` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: buyOnNonExistentPortfolio_returns404 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioErrorHandlingRestIntegrationTest.java:25 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: depositToNonExistentPortfolio_returns404 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioErrorHandlingRestIntegrationTest.java:54 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: getHoldingsOnNonExistentPortfolio_returns404 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioErrorHandlingRestIntegrationTest.java:94 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: getNonExistentPortfolio_returns404 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioErrorHandlingRestIntegrationTest.java:82 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: sellOnNonExistentPortfolio_returns404 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioErrorHandlingRestIntegrationTest.java:40 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: withdrawFromNonExistentPortfolio_returns404 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioErrorHandlingRestIntegrationTest.java:68 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: getHoldings_emptyAfterCreation bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java:54 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: getHoldings_returnsPerformanceForPortfolioWithHoldings bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java:61 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: getPortfolio_returnsDtoWithBasicFields bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java:44 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • No direct assertions: depositNegativeAmount_returns400 bootstrap/src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/PortfolioLifecycleRestIntegrationTest.java:128 — No conventional assertion call was detected, and 43 of 50 tests in `hexastock-bootstrap` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
  • + 33 more in this group — see findings.md.
M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×40
  • README/code drift doc/BOOK-HOME.md:29 — doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `DDD`, but `doc/DDD` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/BOOK-HOME.md:30 — doc/BOOK-HOME.md links to `Remove`, but `doc/Remove` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/diagrams/README.md:52 — doc/diagrams/README.md names `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml`, but no file or folder `.github/workflows/plantuml-svg-autocommit.yml` exists. 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 doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:52 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Portfolio.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:103 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java`, but `doc/domain-review/application/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/application/service/PortfolioStockOperationsService.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:445 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Holding.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Holding.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:604 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/ShareQuantity.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/ShareQuantity.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:605 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Money.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Money.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:606 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Price.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/money/Price.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:607 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/market/Ticker.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/market/Ticker.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:608 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/PortfolioId.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/PortfolioId.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:609 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/HoldingId.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/HoldingId.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:610 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/LotId.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/LotId.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md:621 — doc/domain-review/domain-model-constructive-strategy-review.md links to `domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Lot.java`, but `doc/domain-review/domain/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/portfolio/Lot.java` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/tutorial/DDD-Hexagonal-exercise.md:107 — doc/tutorial/DDD-Hexagonal-exercise.md documents the environment variable `SPECIFIC_ID`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/tutorial/portfolioReporting/HOLDINGS-PERFORMANCE-AT-SCALE.md:333 — doc/tutorial/portfolioReporting/HOLDINGS-PERFORMANCE-AT-SCALE.md documents the environment variable `HALF_EVEN`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:375 — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Portfolio.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Portfolio.java` exists. 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 doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:376 — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Holding.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Holding.java` exists. 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 doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:377 — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Lot.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/Lot.java` exists. 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 doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:378 — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SellResult.java`, but no file or folder `src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SellResult.java` exists. 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 doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:382 — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SettlementAwareSellTest.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/model/SettlementAwareSellTest.java` exists. 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 doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md:383 — doc/tutorial/richVsAnemicDomainModel/RICH_VS_ANEMIC_DOMAIN_MODEL_TUTORIAL.md names `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/SettlementSellIntegrationTest.java`, but no file or folder `src/test/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/in/SettlementSellIntegrationTest.java` exists. 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 doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:317 — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md links to `../../../.gitbook/assets/HexaStock`, but `.gitbook/assets/HexaStock` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:319 — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md links to `../../DDD`, but `doc/DDD` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md:1253 — doc/tutorial/sellStocks/SELL-STOCK-TUTORIAL.md links to `../../Remove`, but `doc/Remove` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • + 15 more in this group — see findings.md.
D19 · Documentation Quality · Documentation · ×2
  • Documentation: no project overview README.md — The opening paragraph describes the book as the long-form reference but does not state what the repository is or what it does (the root README's overview). State the repository's purpose and scope in a one-paragraph overview above the table of contents.
  • Documentation: no contributor guidance README.md — There is no guidance for contributors in the documentation. Add a Contributing section covering pull request process, branch policy, and any required tools.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned file · ×2
  • Orphaned file adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepository.java:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file bootstrap/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/config/RetryOnWriteConflictAspect.java:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
D28 · Secrets (history) · Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
  • REDACTED
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
  • Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 2 of 32 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; 32 of the 93 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: adapters-outbound-persistence-mongodb/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/adapter/out/persistence/mongodb/repository/MongoPortfolioRepository.java, bootstrap/src/main/java/cat/gencat/agaur/hexastock/config/RetryOnWriteConflictAspect.java. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1
  • No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 1938 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1
  • No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
X5 · Nullable reference types · Java packages are not null-marked everywhere · ×1
  • Java packages are not null-marked everywhere — 0/24 of this repository's Java package directories are under a non-null default: a `package-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked` (JSpecify) or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, `@DefaultQualifier(NonNull.class)`; a `module-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked`; every type in it `@NullMarked`; or a build that runs NullAway with the package in `AnnotatedPackages`, or the Checker Framework's `NullnessChecker`. Elsewhere every reference admits null and no checker warns on the dereference that throws a `NullPointerException`.

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-aceaf92d1835412caa88a5fe55ffa527/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .1artifacts/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-aceaf92d1835412caa88a5fe55ffa527/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 .4artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesosv-scanner—osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm .0artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy config --format json --quiet .2artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.0—
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 Dependenciesosv-scanner—osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm .0artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json

Run 01a162de-24ee-75ad-a4e9-489979364ad5 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

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