android/compose-samples

Executive summary

android/compose-samples scores 49 out of 100, which would normally be rated Adequate, but it is rated Weak because its weakest group of dimensions, Security, is rated Critical. The standard never rates a score more than one step above its weakest group, so a high average can't hide a weak area. Watchdog judged it as a template, sample or demo, meant to be read or copied, so the dimensions about building, releasing and running a product don't apply, and its lenses are rated against a lower bar. The score itself is worked out as for any repository.

The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 34 and is rated Adequate. Its Secret Scanning 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 resolve the 6 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning and to 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, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 49 to about 61.

28 findings are critical: 15 in Static Analysis (SAST), six in Secret Scanning, six in Secrets (history) and one in Test Reliability.

Watchdog couldn't measure 13 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Dependency Hygiene and License Compliance, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 43,701 lines, which would take an estimated 0.3 person-years, around €48,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 70 Strong Architecture 91 ★ Exemplary Maturity 59 Adequate, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 34 Adequate, capped by Secret Scanning and Security & performance tooling Security and Compliance 59 Adequate, capped by Static Analysis (SAST) Domain Modelling 60 Adequate, capped by Rich vs anemic model and Constructible invalid state Performance 78 ★ Exemplary

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 34 · counts for 46%Maturity 59 · counts for 25%Security and Compliance 59 · counts for 14%Domain Modelling 60 · counts for 8%Code Health 70 · counts for 4%Performance 78 · counts for 2%Architecture 91 · counts for 1%

If Production Readiness rose from 34 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 49 to about 61.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Product code 97%Tests 3%

New since the last survey: 19 findings

These 19 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 10 October 2026.

Cyclomatic Complexity · UserInputKt.UserInput (cyclomatic 21) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt
Cognitive Complexity · MessageFormatterKt.messageFormatter (cognitive 29) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt
God Classes · FileTooLong: conversation/UserInput.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt
Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt
Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: Conversation.kt → JetchatAppBar.kt, Profile.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PostScreen.kt → AppDrawer.kt, JetnewsApp.kt, MainActivity.kt, PostCards.kt, SelectTopicButton.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostScreen.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PodcastsScreen.kt → WearApp.kt, LatestEpisodesScreen.kt, PodcastDetailsScreen.kt, QueueScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcasts/PodcastsScreen.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: Profile.kt → JumpToBottom.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/profile/Profile.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PostContent.kt → AppDrawer.kt, MainActivity.kt, PostCardTop.kt, PostCardYourNetwork.kt, PostCards.kt, SelectTopicButton.kt, PostScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostContent.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: Home.kt → PreviewData.kt, JetcasterApp.kt, PodcastCategory.kt, Discover.kt, Library.kt, PlayerViewModel.kt, EpisodeListItem.kt, Buttons.kt Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PostCardTop.kt → PostsData.kt, PostCardYourNetwork.kt, InterestsScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardTop.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: AppDrawer.kt → JetnewsApp.kt, PostCards.kt, InterestsScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/AppDrawer.kt
Change Coupling · Change coupling: WearApp.kt ↔ LatestEpisodesScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt
Change Coupling · Change coupling: WearApp.kt ↔ QueueScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt
Change Coupling · Change coupling: JetchatDrawer.kt ↔ JetchatScaffold.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt
Change Coupling · Change coupling: PreviewData.kt ↔ HomeViewModel.kt Jetcaster/core/domain-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/domain/testing/PreviewData.kt

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

Fixed since the last survey: 12 findings

These 12 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 10 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt
Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned knowledge JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt
Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned knowledge Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/widget/layout/ImageTextListLayout.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: Conversation.kt → JetchatAppBar.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: AppDrawer.kt → JetnewsApp.kt, PostCards.kt, InterestsScreen.kt, PostContent.kt, PostScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/AppDrawer.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PodcastsScreen.kt → LatestEpisodesScreen.kt, PodcastDetailsScreen.kt, QueueScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcasts/PodcastsScreen.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: Profile.kt → Conversation.kt, JumpToBottom.kt, ProfileFragment.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/profile/Profile.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PostCardTop.kt → PostsData.kt, PostCardYourNetwork.kt, InterestsScreen.kt, PostContent.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardTop.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: Home.kt → PreviewData.kt, JetcasterApp.kt, PodcastCategory.kt, Discover.kt, Library.kt, Buttons.kt Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt
Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub: PostScreen.kt → MainActivity.kt, PostCards.kt, SelectTopicButton.kt, PostContent.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostScreen.kt
Change Coupling · Change coupling: SelectTopicButton.kt ↔ PostContent.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/SelectTopicButton.kt
Change Coupling · Change coupling: PostCards.kt ↔ PostContent.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCards.kt

Rebuild cost: about €48,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€16,000 to €80,000, for 264 to 837 hours of work, about 0.3 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem	Standard, 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 49. 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.
Size	Medium: 43,701 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.

Resolve the 6 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (6).

Raises the score by about 13 points · Low effort · Secret Scanning

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.

Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Security & performance tooling

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

Raises the score by about 3 points · Medium effort · Deployment & Rollback

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 €48,000 to build again, about 0.3 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 34 (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

Resolve the 6 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 13 points for low effort, because it clears the 6 Secret Scanning findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.

Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

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.

178 modules, with 229 dependencies between them. 3 loops run through 7 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 138 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	2 jetcaster.core.data.database.model	3 jetnews.model	7 jetcaster.core.data.database.dao	8 jetcaster.core.data.network	9 jetcaster.core.model	10 jetnews.data.interests	11 jetnews.data.posts	12 jetnews.ui.home.HomeUiState	13 jetcaster.core.data.repository	14 jetcaster.core.player.model	15 jetnews.data	16 jetnews.ui.home	18 jetcaster.core.domain	19 jetcaster.core.player	20 jetcaster.tv.model	25 jetcaster.tv.ui.discover	27 jetcaster.tv.ui.library	29 jetcaster.tv.ui.podcast	30 jetcaster.tv.ui.search	34 jetcaster.ui.library
1 compose.jetchat.conversation
2 jetcaster.core.data.database.model
3 jetnews.model
4 jetsnack.model
5 reply.data
6 reply.ui.utils
7 jetcaster.core.data.database.dao	5
8 jetcaster.core.data.network	1
9 jetcaster.core.model	1
10 jetnews.data.interests											1
11 jetnews.data.posts		2									1
12 jetnews.ui.home.HomeUiState		1										2
13 jetcaster.core.data.repository	16		9	1
14 jetcaster.core.player.model					2
15 jetnews.data						2	2
16 jetnews.ui.home		7					2	1
17 jetcaster.core.data.di			6						3
18 jetcaster.core.domain	1				4				4
19 jetcaster.core.player										3
20 jetcaster.tv.model	2				2					1
21 jetcaster.tv.ui										1
22 jetcaster.ui.podcasts	1				2				1
23 jetnews.ui.post		5					2					1
24 jetcaster.tv.ui.component					4					6					2
25 jetcaster.tv.ui.discover					4				2	2				1	3
26 jetcaster.tv.ui.episode									2	2				1
27 jetcaster.tv.ui.library					2				3	2				1	2
28 jetcaster.tv.ui.player										2				2	1
29 jetcaster.tv.ui.podcast	1				2				2	2				1	1
30 jetcaster.tv.ui.search	1				4				3						4
31 jetcaster.ui.episode	1								1	2				1
32 jetcaster.ui.home	1				13				3	1			2	1
33 jetcaster.ui.latest_episodes										2			1	1
34 jetcaster.ui.library	2				2				4	2			1	1
35 jetcaster.ui.podcast	1								2	2				1
36 jetcaster.tv.ui.discover.DiscoverScreenUiState					2										2	2
37 jetcaster.tv.ui.library.LibraryScreenUiState					1										1		3
38 jetcaster.tv.ui.podcast.PodcastScreenUiState					1										1			3
39 jetcaster.tv.ui.search.SearchScreenUiState					1										2				3
40 jetcaster.ui.library.LibraryScreenUiState	1				1					1										3

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 70% · Strong ·

The Good

D1 · Kotlin Cyclomatic Complexity 9.1 D2 · Kotlin Cognitive Complexity 8.2 D3 · Kotlin God Classes 8.9 D4 · Kotlin Code Duplication 9.8 D17 · Kotlin Explicit Debt 9.9 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 10.0

The Bad

X3 · Repo Exception handling 5.6

The Ugly

X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 4.0

At a glance — Architecture · 91% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Kotlin Coupling 9.6 D6 · Kotlin Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · Kotlin Project Cohesion 7.6 D35 · Kotlin Change Coupling 7.9 AX10 · Repo Code composition 8.7 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0

At a glance — Maturity · 59% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good

D15 · Kotlin Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.3 D16 · Kotlin Bus Factor 9.1 D19 · Kotlin Documentation Quality 8.0 D21 · Kotlin Naming Consistency 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.3 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Bad

D34 · Kotlin Knowledge Freshness 4.7

The Ugly

M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 34% · Adequate · gated by D13, P3 ·

The Good

P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0

The Bad

P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 5.0

The Ugly

D13 · Kotlin Secret Scanning 0.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 3.0

At a glance — Security · 59% · Adequate · gated by D29 ·

The Good

D31 · Kotlin IaC & Container Security 10.0 D44 · Kotlin Platform End-of-Life 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0

The Bad

D36 · Kotlin Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 5.0

The Ugly

D28 · Kotlin Secrets (history) 4.0 D29 · Kotlin Static Analysis (SAST) 0.6

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 60% · Adequate · gated by DM4, DM11 ·

The Good

DM12 · Repo Ambient inputs in the domain 10.0 DM5 · Repo Encapsulated state 10.0 DM6 · Repo Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary 10.0 DM8 · Repo Value-object opportunities 10.0

The Ugly

DM11 · Repo Constructible invalid state 3.0 DM4 · Repo Rich vs anemic model 3.0

At a glance — Performance · 78% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF2 · Repo Allocation hygiene 6.1 PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A05:2025 — Injection	18	High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures	12	High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	3	Medium

Roadmap

Immediately resolve the six leaked secrets, starting with REDACTED, and integrate a SAST step into CI to prevent security regressions from reaching production. Implement a manual approval gate for releases to stop bad builds before they are published, and maintain a changelog to track what ships in each version. Finally, document significant design decisions in a dedicated folder to preserve architectural context for the team.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 6 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (6).	+13.0 pts	Low	Secret Scanning
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.	+5.4 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.	+3.2 pts	Medium	Deployment & Rollback
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.	+3.2 pts	Medium	Release Hygiene
Resolve the 6 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (6).	+0.9 pts	Low	Secrets (history)
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.	+1.5 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
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.	+1.1 pts	Medium	Constructible invalid state
Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.	+1.1 pts	Medium	Rich vs anemic model

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 74 files carrying findings, judged against the Template bar: 0% slop · 19% mixed · 81% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
Jetchat/app/src/androidTest/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/UserInputTest.kt	5.3	Mixed	Test Reliability: Test declared unreliable: sendButton_enableToggles
Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt	5.6	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cyclomatic 25)
Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt	5.9	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cyclomatic 25)
Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt	5.9	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: UserInputKt.UserInput (cyclomatic 21)
Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt	6.0	Near-clean	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt	6.0	Near-clean	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/theme/Theme.kt	6.7	Near-clean	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
REDACTED	6.9	Near-clean	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt	7.0	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (14 lines × 2)
Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt	7.2	Near-clean	God Classes: FileTooLong: player/PlayerScreen.kt

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 — 28

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 — 109

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 — 126

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

Could not be resolved — 14

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. 58 of 61 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — 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 — 61 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D13D15D16D17D19D21D26D28D29D31D34D35D36D44AX10AX3AX4DM11DM12DM4DM5DM6DM8M1M2M3M4P1P3P4P6PF2PF3X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X5

Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 249 of 263 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a16eeb-820b-77fc-93b8-8059234cd48c.

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 (.kt) 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` or the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) 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` or the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) 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. This repository declares 1 of its own test(s) unreliable. The built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem (.kt), so the suite was not re-run and no reliability score is given — these are the repository's own declarations, not our measurement.
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 — 26 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 466 dependency(ies) and leaving 140 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.
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 (Jetcaster/core/data-testing/build.gradle.kts), 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.
D27 Navigability — 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. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
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. Boot via AndroidApp (JetLagged/app). the Android app did not build — `./gradlew :app:assembleDebug` exited 1: lugin is not in 'org.gradle' namespace) - Included Builds (No included builds contain this plugin) - Plugin Repositories (could not resolve plugin artifact 'com.android.application:com.android.applica…; runtime evidence skipped (launch chosen because JetLagged/app/build.gradle.kts applies the Android application plugin and JetLagged/gradlew builds it).
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.
DM9 Scattered domain decisions — 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 measured — scattered-decision detection needs expression-level symbol resolution: a comparison operand bound to the member it judges (arm one) and a construction bound to the type it produces (arm two). A Roslyn compilation carries both; arm two alone also runs on any frontend that declares whether a construction is produced or passed, and this target loaded neither.
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 Kotlin 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.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Kotlin 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.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
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.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby and Python source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby or Python 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.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
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.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
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.
DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (3): D19, D21, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.1 / 10Stronggated by 4 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 9.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble at 25.

ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cyclomatic 25)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:712

VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cyclomatic 25)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189

UserInputKt.UserInput (cyclomatic 21)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt:153

BaseBackdropNode.draw (cyclomatic 16)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BaseBackdropNode.kt:92

What to do

Bring the 4 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cyclomatic 25), VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cyclomatic 25), UserInputKt.UserInput (cyclomatic 21). — 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 4 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.1 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity8.2 / 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 8.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

8 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble at 45.

ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cognitive 45)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:712

VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cognitive 45)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189

BaseBackdropNode.draw (cognitive 31)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BaseBackdropNode.kt:92

MessageFormatterKt.messageFormatter (cognitive 29)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt:66

UserInputKt.UserInput (cognitive 28)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt:153

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

What to do

Bring the 8 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cognitive 45), VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cognitive 45), BaseBackdropNode.draw (cognitive 31). — 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 8 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 8.2 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes8.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").

Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.

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

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

FileTooLong: impl/PostsData.kt · ×6JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt

MethodTooLong: VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer · ×5Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189

What to do

Resolve the 6 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with PostsData.kt, UserInput.kt, PlayerScreen.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with PlayerScreen.kt (2), VideoPlayer.kt, Snacks.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.8 / 10Stronggated by 18 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×3JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/HomeScreens.kt:672

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt:197

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:319

Duplicated block (56 lines × 2)Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:282

Duplicated block (26 lines × 4)Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:324

+ 10 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with HomeScreens.kt, PlayerScreen.kt, LatestEpisodesScreen.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with VideoPlayerControls.kt, Profile.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with BackdropBlurModifier.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling9.6 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

20 production modules (Gradle), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; edges a convention plugin adds from buildSrc or build-logic are not visible there; 1 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 14 of the 20 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: Jetcaster:core:designsystem

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 38 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · Secret Scanning0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

6 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 6 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).
Enforce Secret Scanning in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.3 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Top hotspots: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt (32×25=800); Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt (24×21=504); Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt (12×25=300)

Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt · ×4Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:712

What to do

Resolve the 4 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with Conversation.kt, UserInput.kt, VideoPlayer.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D16 · Bus Factor9.1 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

19 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt. Counted over 210 of the 382 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 · ×3

Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt9.9 / 10Stronggated by 18 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

18 deducted task-comment markers across 43701 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 9.9. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×18JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/deeplink/util/DeepLinkRequest.kt:41

What to do

Resolve the 18 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with UserInputTest.kt (2), ReplyNavigationComponents.kt (2), DeepLinkRequest.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README and the JetLagged/JetNews/Jetchat/Jetsnack/Reply samples all describe a set of individual Android Studio projects built with Jetpack Compose to demonstrate different use cases, complexity levels, and architecture features. The root README is excellent at overview (what the project is for, what it does), installation, usage, and licensing; each sample directory's README is focused on its own app (JetLagged, JetNews, Jetchat, Jetsnack, Reply) with clear screenshots, a feature list, and links to code. The architecture/design docs are absent from the visible content, so any architectural guidance would fall under an unshown document.

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — The repository's root README and the JetLagged/JetNews/Jetchat/Jetsnack/Reply samples all describe a set of individual Android Studio projects built with Jetpack Compose to demonstrate different use cases, complexity levels, and architecture features. The root README is excellent at overview (what the project is for, what it does), installation, usage, and licensing; each sample directory's README is focused on its own app (JetLagged, JetNews, Jetchat, Jetsnack, Reply) with clear screenshots, a feature list, and links to code. The architecture/design docs are absent from the visible content, so any architectural guidance would fall under an unshown document.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion7.6 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 of 20 build units (Gradle) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 4.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

6 finding(s): 0 critical, 6 high, 0 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 6 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.6 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

18 finding(s): 0 critical, 15 high, 3 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 6 file(s) — `JetLagged/gradlew` (line 74, line 178), `JetNews/gradlew` (line 74, line 178), `Jetcaster/gradlew` (line 177), `Jetchat/gradlew` (line 74, line 178), `Jetsnack/gradlew` (line 74, line 178), … (+1 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 12 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED (3), REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness4.7 / 10Weak✓ 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 4.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

114 of 210 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt. Counted over 210 of the 382 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned file · ×111Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:1

Most significant orphaned file · ×3JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt:1

Concentrated knowledge decay

What to do

Resolve the 111 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with Color.kt (5), Type.kt (5), Theme.kt (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (111 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with PostsData.kt, ReplyNavigationComponents.kt, ImageTextListLayout.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Concentrated knowledge decay finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling7.9 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: JetchatAppBar.kt↔Conversation.kt 88%; NavActivity.kt↔JetchatScaffold.kt 83%; JetnewsApp.kt↔MainActivity.kt 79%

Change coupling: NavActivity.kt ↔ JetchatScaffold.kt · ×22Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/NavActivity.kt:1

Change-coupling hub: Conversation.kt → JetchatAppBar.kt, Profile.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt · ×9Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt

What to do

Resolve the 22 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with HomeScreenCards.kt (2), MainActivity.kt (2), WearApp.kt (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (22 warning-level).
Resolve the 9 Change-coupling hub finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with Conversation.kt, PostScreen.kt, PodcastsScreen.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 14 platform declaration(s) and 466 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition8.7 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.

Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM11 · Constructible invalid state3.0 / 10Weak✓ 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.

`Category`'s public constructor takes `name` 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 `Category` 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. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Category.kt:32
`Episode`'s public constructor takes `uri`, `podcastUri`, `title`, `subtitle`, … 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 `Episode` 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. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Episode.kt:46
`Podcast`'s public constructor takes `uri`, `title`, `description`, `author`, … 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 `Podcast` 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. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Podcast.kt:32
`PodcastCategoryEntry`'s public constructor takes `podcastUri` 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 `PodcastCategoryEntry` 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. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/PodcastCategoryEntry.kt:51
`PodcastFollowedEntry`'s public constructor takes `podcastUri` 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 `PodcastFollowedEntry` 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. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/PodcastFollowedEntry.kt:42

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM12 · Ambient inputs in the domain10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether domain types receive the time and randomness their rules depend on, rather than reading the process clock or a global random source directly — an ambient read makes the rule it feeds untestable at the instant that matters and lets two reads inside one operation disagree.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated, C#/VB only): domain-layer types scanned for ambient reads — DateTime/DateTimeOffset.Now/UtcNow/Today, Random.Shared, new Random(), Stopwatch.GetTimestamp — resolved against the semantic model, with a comment/string-stripped token fallback only where resolution fails. Body reads are scored; field/property initialisers are surfaced unscored. Apply/When folds excluded (ES1 owns them). Deterministic, symbol-resolved.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM4 · Rich vs anemic model3.0 / 10Weak✓ 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.

`Category` is an aggregate/entity with 2 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Category.kt:32
`Episode` is an aggregate/entity with 9 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Episode.kt:46
`Podcast` is an aggregate/entity with 6 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Podcast.kt:32

What to do

Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM6 · Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies (EF/Marten/HTTP/ASP.NET) — the clean-architecture dependency rule.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): domain-layer types scanned for infrastructure usage in member SIGNATURES and inside method/accessor BODIES — resolved calls and object-creations into EF/Marten/HTTP/Mongo/Redis/message-bus types (not just a namespace allowlist). Deterministic, symbol-resolved, exhaustive over domain-layer bodies, DDD-native.

Coverage: Domain layer identified by NAMESPACE heuristic; infrastructure then resolved by symbol in member SIGNATURES and method/accessor BODIES — rename the layer and the check evaporates.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

What to do

Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add a README to the 14 of 20 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.4 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation2.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add 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 26078 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.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF2 · Allocation hygiene6.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's memory manager — buffer/slice views over copies, object pooling, stack or value-type allocation, and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.

Method: Production-source scan: density (per 1k LoC) of allocation-aware APIs — in .NET Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit; off .NET, with comments and strings blanked, Go's sync.Pool, preallocated slices/maps, Grow, strconv.Append* and buf[:0] reuse; the JVM's NIO buffer views, MemorySegment, primitive collections, pools and literal presizes (plus Kotlin primitive arrays and value classes, Scala AnyVal and @specialized); Swift's reserveCapacity, ContiguousArray, withUnsafe* access and ~Copyable. Activated off .NET on the same floor (400 lines, and benchmarks or 8 uses); Rust and garbage-collected scripting languages are not applicable. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

What to do

Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 13 use(s) across 46,950 production line(s) (~0.3/1k). More of the idioms below on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
Kotlin: on hot paths, use primitive arrays (IntArray, LongArray …) and @JvmInline value classes instead of boxed values, primitive collections (androidx.collection, fastutil) instead of boxed ones, and presize collections and StringBuilders.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X2 · Cancellation propagation4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether suspend functions that make a cancellable request accept or pass on the coroutine's cancellation (adoption curve).

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

Only 0/1 suspend functions that make a cancellable request (Ktor, OkHttp newCall, URL streams) accept the coroutine's cancellation or pass one on, so a request keeps running after whatever wanted it has given up — a screen navigated away from, a disposed widget, a superseded search. In a suspend function, make the request with a call that suspends — Ktor, OkHttp's `executeAsync()`, or a `suspendCancellableCoroutine` that cancels the `Call` — not a blocking `execute()`: `withContext(Dispatchers.IO)` moves the call off the caller's thread but does not make it cancellable; where nothing could ever cancel the call, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against how the function is used.
`fetchPodcast` suspends, but makes its request with `newCall(…).execute()`, which blocks: its caller's cancellation cannot reach the request, so it runs to its end after whatever wanted it has given up — `withContext(Dispatchers.IO)` moves it off the caller's thread and does not change that. Make the request with a call that suspends: Ktor, OkHttp's `executeAsync()`, or a `suspendCancellableCoroutine` over `enqueue` that cancels the `Call` in `invokeOnCancellation`. — Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/network/PodcastFetcher.kt:89

What to do

Thread the coroutine's cancellation through suspend functions that make requests, so the work stops when its caller gives up.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Code Health — Whether a `for (x in c)` or `c.forEach { … }` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a `mutableListOf`/`ArrayList`, `mutableMapOf`/`HashMap` or `mutableSetOf`/`HashSet` is a `java.util` collection on the JVM and is walked by its own fail-fast iterator, so a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is walking makes the next step throw `ConcurrentModificationException` and the remaining elements 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X3 · Exception handling5.6 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

`catch (_: Throwable)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:373

What to do

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded)

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X5 · Nullable reference types10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether Kotlin's null safety is not undermined by not-null assertions — `String` cannot hold null and `String?` must be checked before use in every Kotlin module, and each `!!` is a run-time `NullPointerException` the author has told the compiler cannot happen.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	70%	Strong	Solid.
Architecture	91%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Maturity	59%	Adequate — gated by M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	34%	Adequate — gated by D13, P3	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	59%	Adequate — gated by D29	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling	60%	Adequate — gated by DM4, DM11	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	78%	Exemplary	Solid.

Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

D11 Test Reliability — 1 observation(s) recorded · This repository declares 1 of its own test(s) unreliable. The built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem (.kt), so the suite was not re-run and no reliability score is given — these are the repository's own declarations, not our measurement.

Not evidenced — 1 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.

P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 67 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.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: Dagger rejects, at compile time, a component that holds a binding with a narrower scope than its own.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No class in this Kotlin code is a Spring, JSR-330 or CDI singleton bean.
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
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 — the Android app did not build — `./gradlew :app:assembleDebug` exited 1: lugin is not in 'org.gradle' namespace) - Included Builds (No included builds contain this plugin) - Plugin Repositories (could not resolve plugin artifact 'com.android.application:com.android.applica…; runtime evidence skipped (launch chosen because JetLagged/app/build.gradle.kts applies the Android application plugin and JetLagged/gradlew builds it) This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the app is inaccessible, only that it was never run.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect.
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.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named column (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone_number, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no sensitive data whose changes an audit trail would record. If it does (through a store configured outside this repository, for instance), the trail belongs to wherever that data is stored.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
D10 Test Quality — ~1247 lines of test source are present (.kt) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 26 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 466 dependency(ies) and leaving 140 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 466 declared JVM dependency coordinate(s) were read from its 26 Maven/Gradle manifest(s), but Maven Central could not be asked for the licence of 125 of them (HTTP 429 Too Many Requests from https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/accompanist/accompanist-adaptive/0.37.3/accompanist-adaptive-0.37.3.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.
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.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — this repo declares itself a template / kata / sample / demo; a formal ADR log is deferred to a real application built from it.
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. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.kt), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Gradle build (build.gradle/build.gradle.kts) — not scanned yet).
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 — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Gradle build (build.gradle/build.gradle.kts) — not scanned yet).
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.kt) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so its unit/integration/BDD/E2E split couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
DM1 Aggregate boundaries — no aggregates detected — aggregate-boundary check not applicable
DM10 One transaction, one aggregate — no repository writes detected — no operation to judge against the one-aggregate rule
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
DM7 Repository granularity — no repository abstraction detected (e.g. uses a document session)
DM9 Scattered domain decisions — not measured — scattered-decision detection needs expression-level symbol resolution: a comparison operand bound to the member it judges (arm one) and a construction bound to the type it produces (arm two). A Roslyn compilation carries both; arm two alone also runs on any frontend that declares whether a construction is produced or passed, and this target loaded neither
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.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P2 Observability — This repository's JVM source (20 module(s), 349 file(s) read) declares no entry point and bootstraps no server, and nothing here deploys a service — it is a library, run inside whatever hosts it, so production observability (structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks) is N/A. If it grows a binary or a service, the dimension reactivates.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JVM source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report` or the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) 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.
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.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — 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
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 Kotlin was read, and it logs through none that an assembled message defeats: Android's `Log` and Timber, java.util.logging and log4j-api-kotlin take one finished message (as log4net does in C#), or it makes no call through a named logger at all. Calls made through SLF4J, log4j 2 or kotlin-logging (`LoggerFactory.getLogger`, `KotlinLogging.logger {}`) 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 — 28 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D13 · Secret Scanning · Leaked secret · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D28 · Secrets (history) · High secret · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D11 · Test Reliability · Test declared unreliable · ×1

Test declared unreliable: sendButton_enableToggles Jetchat/app/src/androidTest/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/UserInputTest.kt:128 — This test is disabled or skipped with a reason naming unreliability — the repository's own words: "Flaky due to https://issuetracker.google.com/169235317". A test that is skipped for flakiness is neither passing nor protecting the code it covers; either stabilise it or delete it, but do not leave it disabled indefinitely. (Found by reading the repository's own test source — the suite itself was not re-run, since the reliability runner does not support this ecosystem.)

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

Serious — 109 finding(s)

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×22

Change coupling: NavActivity.kt ↔ JetchatScaffold.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/NavActivity.kt:1 — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/NavActivity.kt` and `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatScaffold.kt` change together 83% of the time (10 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `7ef81dea` Make the Nav3 back stack the single source of truth for Jetchat navig…; `6f2e45fe` fix: wrong highlighted item in drawer; `5e49e2ba` Added predictive back support to Jetchat drawer — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: JetnewsApp.kt ↔ MainActivity.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/JetnewsApp.kt:1 — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/JetnewsApp.kt` and `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/MainActivity.kt` change together 79% of the time (11 of the 14 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 11 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `c47eb9ba` Address feedback; `b77e984e` Update deep link back behavior; `89ea885d` Add edge-to-edge to Jetnews — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: VideoPlayer.kt ↔ VideoPlayerControls.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:1 — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt` and `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt` change together 73% of the time (8 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `2292d216` Switch to our video - and add conditional video player message on top…; `36b60d8a` Fix video controls; `f13ca86f` Reorder, move content around to have better structure. — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: InterestsScreen.kt ↔ SelectTopicButton.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/InterestsScreen.kt:1 — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/InterestsScreen.kt` and `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/SelectTopicButton.kt` change together 71% of the time (30 of the 42 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 30 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `769f24fa` Update icons and remove material icons dependency; `521bd774` [Jetnews] Improve @Previews; `dfa7e30d` [Jetnews] UI polish bugs #458 — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: HomeScreenCards.kt ↔ HeartRateCard.kt JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/HomeScreenCards.kt:1 — `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/HomeScreenCards.kt` and `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/heartrate/HeartRateCard.kt` change together 70% of the time (7 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `98e02709` Renamed JetLaggedTheme.colors to extraColors; `674ddb68` Added a dark theme; `11957739` Extract width modifiers into caller site — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: HeartRateCard.kt ↔ JetLaggedTimeGraph.kt JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/heartrate/HeartRateCard.kt:1 — `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/heartrate/HeartRateCard.kt` and `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/sleep/JetLaggedTimeGraph.kt` change together 70% of the time (7 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `98e02709` Renamed JetLaggedTheme.colors to extraColors; `674ddb68` Added a dark theme; `d3791f68` 🤖 Apply Spotless — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: LibraryScreen.kt ↔ PlayerScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/library/LibraryScreen.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/library/LibraryScreen.kt` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt` change together 69% of the time (9 of the 13 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `7ac2aba7` merge and fix horologist experiemtnal issue; `2943e294` Updates to latest Compose and bump target SDK; `7bd70479` Address Compose and Jetpack library deprecations across samples — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: HomeScreenCards.kt ↔ JetLaggedTimeGraph.kt JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/HomeScreenCards.kt:1 — `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/HomeScreenCards.kt` and `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/sleep/JetLaggedTimeGraph.kt` change together 64% of the time (7 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `98e02709` Renamed JetLaggedTheme.colors to extraColors; `674ddb68` Added a dark theme; `11957739` Extract width modifiers into caller site — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: MainActivity.kt ↔ ReplyListContent.kt Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/MainActivity.kt:1 — `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/MainActivity.kt` and `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/ReplyListContent.kt` change together 62% of the time (13 of the 21 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 13 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `296eaafd` Contrast aware updates.; `c950ca0c` Add edge-to-edge support to Reply; `5bef3db1` Hoist selected email ids to UIState and Viewmodel — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: LatestEpisodeViewModel.kt ↔ LibraryScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodeViewModel.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodeViewModel.kt` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/library/LibraryScreen.kt` change together 60% of the time (6 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `f6fc63fb` Refactor home to library (at that commit the file was still `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodeViewModel.kt`); `3832b738` Fix wear model references. (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/library/LatestEpisodeViewModel.kt` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeScreen.kt`); `f9b345ba` Enable play/pause on the Player (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/library/LatestEpisodeViewModel.kt` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeScreen.kt`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: Color.kt ↔ Themes.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Color.kt:1 — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Color.kt` and `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Themes.kt` change together 58% of the time (7 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `01b57069` update typography of input box and add double to like; `e61db8a1` address comments; `94f1e2ca` addressed comments — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: UserInput.kt ↔ Color.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt:1 — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt` and `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Color.kt` change together 58% of the time (7 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `01b57069` update typography of input box and add double to like; `abea218c` Address Jetchat Material 3 feedback; `1f107716` [Jetchat] Update to Material 3 (at that commit the file was still `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Colors.kt`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: Themes.kt ↔ Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Themes.kt:1 — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Themes.kt` and `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Typography.kt` change together 58% of the time (7 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `01b57069` update typography of input box and add double to like; `e61db8a1` address comments; `94f1e2ca` addressed comments — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: PostCardYourNetwork.kt ↔ PostCards.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardYourNetwork.kt:1 — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardYourNetwork.kt` and `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCards.kt` change together 58% of the time (36 of the 62 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 36 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `635b3fd2` Rename 'article' functions and variables to use 'post' instead. Updat…; `6201d502` Fix version update issues; `f9157140` [JetNews] Remove Hardcoded Strings (#613) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: MainActivity.kt ↔ ReplyApp.kt Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/MainActivity.kt:1 — `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/MainActivity.kt` and `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/ReplyApp.kt` change together 57% of the time (12 of the 21 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 12 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `296eaafd` Contrast aware updates.; `c950ca0c` Add edge-to-edge support to Reply; `5bef3db1` Hoist selected email ids to UIState and Viewmodel — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: ReplyEmailThreadItem.kt ↔ Theme.kt Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/components/ReplyEmailThreadItem.kt:1 — `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/components/ReplyEmailThreadItem.kt` and `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/theme/Theme.kt` change together 55% of the time (6 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `5f917a7d` 🤖 Apply Spotless; `84a8e6bd` Addressed code review feedback.; `fcce31ee` 🤖 Apply Spotless — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: JetcasterApp.kt ↔ SearchScreen.kt Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/JetcasterApp.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/JetcasterApp.kt` and `Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/search/SearchScreen.kt` change together 55% of the time (6 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `7bd70479` Address Compose and Jetpack library deprecations across samples; `ace200b0` Replace tv-foundation with Compose Foundation 1.7.0-beta04 as tv-foun…; `b136c750` Add Hilt to TV and Wear (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/tv-app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/JetcasterApp.kt` and `Jetcaster/tv-app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/search/SearchScreen.kt`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: WearApp.kt ↔ LatestEpisodesScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt` change together 54% of the time (7 of the 13 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `81f4d238` Spotless apply; `0db727a5` Add remaining previews and refactoring; `f88ad496` Use a podcast specific scaffold — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: PodcastCategory.kt ↔ Buttons.kt Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/category/PodcastCategory.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/category/PodcastCategory.kt` and `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/Buttons.kt` change together 53% of the time (8 of the 15 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `e7e54062` [Jetcaster] Migrate from M2 to M3. (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/category/PodcastCategory.kt` and `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/Buttons.kt`); `370eff0e` [Jetcaster] Upgrade to snapshot 7123292 (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/category/PodcastCategory.kt` and `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/Buttons.kt`); `0e8294a8` [Jetcaster] Hide deprecation warnings for animations (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/category/PodcastCategory.kt` and `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/Buttons.kt`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: WearApp.kt ↔ QueueScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/queue/QueueScreen.kt` change together 50% of the time (7 of the 14 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `81f4d238` Spotless apply; `09741435` Update to latest Horologist; `0db727a5` Add remaining previews and refactoring — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: JetchatDrawer.kt ↔ JetchatScaffold.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt:1 — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt` and `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatScaffold.kt` change together 50% of the time (6 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `7ef81dea` Make the Nav3 back stack the single source of truth for Jetchat navig…; `6f2e45fe` fix: wrong highlighted item in drawer; `5e49e2ba` Added predictive back support to Jetchat drawer — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: PreviewData.kt ↔ HomeViewModel.kt Jetcaster/core/domain-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/domain/testing/PreviewData.kt:1 — `Jetcaster/core/domain-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/domain/testing/PreviewData.kt` and `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeViewModel.kt` change together 50% of the time (6 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `73172c6c` [Jetcaster]: Display latest episodes for all subscribed podcasts in l… (at that commit the file was still `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/PreviewData.kt`); `31265722` 🤖 Apply Spotless (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/PreviewData.kt` and `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeViewModel.kt`); `836c888c` [Jetcaster] Improve scrolling in Home screen (at that commit the files were still `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/PreviewData.kt` and `Jetcaster/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeViewModel.kt`) — run `git show` on any of them.

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×18

TodoComment JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/deeplink/util/DeepLinkRequest.kt:41 — // TODO add parsing for other Uri components, i.e. fragments, mimeType, action — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/deeplink/util/DeepLinkPattern.kt:62 — // TODO make these lazy — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/core/data-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/testing/repository/TestPodcastStore.kt:29 — // TODO: Move to :testing module upon merging PR #1379
TodoComment Jetcaster/core/data-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/testing/repository/TestEpisodeStore.kt:28 — // TODO: Move to :testing module upon merging PR #1379
TodoComment Jetcaster/core/data-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/testing/repository/TestCategoryStore.kt:32 — // TODO: Move to :testing module upon merging PR #1379
TodoComment Jetcaster/core/designsystem/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/designsystem/component/PodcastImage.kt:46 — // TODO: Remove the nested component modifier when shared elements are applied to entire app — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/core/domain/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/player/MockEpisodePlayer.kt:65 — // TODO handle error state — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/glancewidget/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/glancewidget/JetcasterAppWidget.kt:297 — // TODO: confirm radius with design — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeViewModel.kt:155 — // TODO: look at result of runCatching and show any errors — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt:650 — // TODO: Using BoxWithConstraints is not quite performant since it requires 2 passes to compute — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/discover/Discover.kt:61 — // TODO: empty state — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/theme/Color.kt:109 — // Todo: specify surfaceTint — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetchat/app/src/androidTest/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/UserInputTest.kt:86 — // TODO: Workaround for synchronization issue with "back" — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Jetchat/app/src/androidTest/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/UserInputTest.kt:114 — // TODO: Soft keyboard is not correctly synchronized — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/ReplyListContent.kt:78 — // TODO: Show top app bar over full width of app when in multi-select mode — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:264 — // TODO remove custom nav drawer content positioning when NavDrawer component supports it. ticket : b/232495216 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:347 — // TODO remove custom nav drawer content positioning when NavDrawer component supports it. ticket : b/232495216 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/theme/Theme.kt:274 — // TODO(b/336693596): UIModeManager is not yet supported in preview — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub · ×9

Change-coupling hub: Conversation.kt → JetchatAppBar.kt, Profile.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt` changes together with 5 other files — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatAppBar.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/profile/Profile.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Color.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Themes.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Typography.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 5 separate couplings, not 5 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 5.
Change-coupling hub: PostScreen.kt → AppDrawer.kt, JetnewsApp.kt, MainActivity.kt, PostCards.kt, SelectTopicButton.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostScreen.kt — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostScreen.kt` changes together with 5 other files — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/AppDrawer.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/JetnewsApp.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/MainActivity.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCards.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/SelectTopicButton.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 5 separate couplings, not 5 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 5.
Change-coupling hub: PodcastsScreen.kt → WearApp.kt, LatestEpisodesScreen.kt, PodcastDetailsScreen.kt, QueueScreen.kt Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcasts/PodcastsScreen.kt — `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcasts/PodcastsScreen.kt` changes together with 4 other files — `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/WearApp.kt`, `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt`, `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt`, `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/queue/QueueScreen.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 4 separate couplings, not 4 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 4.
Change-coupling hub: Profile.kt → JumpToBottom.kt, Color.kt, Themes.kt, Typography.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/profile/Profile.kt — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/profile/Profile.kt` changes together with 4 other files — `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/JumpToBottom.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Color.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Themes.kt`, `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Typography.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 4 separate couplings, not 4 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 4.
Change-coupling hub: PostContent.kt → AppDrawer.kt, MainActivity.kt, PostCardTop.kt, PostCardYourNetwork.kt, PostCards.kt, SelectTopicButton.kt, PostScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostContent.kt — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostContent.kt` changes together with 7 other files — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/AppDrawer.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/MainActivity.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardTop.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardYourNetwork.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCards.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/SelectTopicButton.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostScreen.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 7 separate couplings, not 7 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 7.
Change-coupling hub: Home.kt → PreviewData.kt, JetcasterApp.kt, PodcastCategory.kt, Discover.kt, Library.kt, PlayerViewModel.kt, EpisodeListItem.kt, Buttons.kt Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt — `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt` changes together with 8 other files — `Jetcaster/core/domain-testing/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/domain/testing/PreviewData.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/JetcasterApp.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/category/PodcastCategory.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/discover/Discover.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/library/Library.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerViewModel.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/shared/EpisodeListItem.kt`, `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/Buttons.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 8 separate couplings, not 8 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 8.
Change-coupling hub: PostCardTop.kt → PostsData.kt, PostCardYourNetwork.kt, InterestsScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardTop.kt — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardTop.kt` changes together with 3 other files — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCardYourNetwork.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/InterestsScreen.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 3 separate couplings, not 3 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 3.
Change-coupling hub: AppDrawer.kt → JetnewsApp.kt, PostCards.kt, InterestsScreen.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/AppDrawer.kt — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/AppDrawer.kt` changes together with 3 other files — `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/JetnewsApp.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCards.kt`, `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/interests/InterestsScreen.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 3 separate couplings, not 3 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 3.
Change-coupling hub: JetLaggedScreen.kt → HomeScreenCards.kt, MainActivity.kt, HeartRateCard.kt, JetLaggedTimeGraph.kt JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/JetLaggedScreen.kt — `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/JetLaggedScreen.kt` changes together with 4 other files — `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/HomeScreenCards.kt`, `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/MainActivity.kt`, `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/heartrate/HeartRateCard.kt`, `JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/sleep/JetLaggedTimeGraph.kt` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 4 separate couplings, not 4 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 4.

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×6

FileTooLong: impl/PostsData.kt JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt — FileTooLong — 903 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 403 over it, 1.81× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: conversation/UserInput.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt — FileTooLong — 716 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 216 over it, 1.43× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: player/PlayerScreen.kt Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt — FileTooLong — 687 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 187 over it, 1.37× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: conversation/Conversation.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt — FileTooLong — 680 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 180 over it, 1.36× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: home/Home.kt Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/Home.kt — FileTooLong — 571 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 71 over it, 1.14× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: data/FakeSleepData.kt JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/data/FakeSleepData.kt — FileTooLong — 559 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 59 over it, 1.12× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×5

MethodTooLong: VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189 — MethodTooLong — FullScreenVideoPlayer runs 151 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 51 over it, 1.51× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: SnacksKt.HighlightSnackItem Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/components/Snacks.kt:260 — MethodTooLong — HighlightSnackItem runs 134 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 34 over it, 1.34× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: PlayerScreenKt.PlayerButtons Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:710 — MethodTooLong — PlayerButtons runs 114 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 14 over it, 1.14× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: PlayerScreenKt.PlayerScreen Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:99 — MethodTooLong — PlayerScreen runs 114 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 14 over it, 1.14× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: MeshUtilsKt.rememberUserInputGlowMeshGradientPainter Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/MeshUtils.kt:46 — MethodTooLong — rememberUserInputGlowMeshGradientPainter runs 101 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 1 over it, 1.01× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

DM11 · Constructible invalid state · Constructible in an invalid state · ×5

Constructible in an invalid state: Category Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Category.kt:32 — `Category`'s public constructor takes `name` 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 `Category` 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: Episode Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Episode.kt:46 — `Episode`'s public constructor takes `uri`, `podcastUri`, `title`, `subtitle`, … 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 `Episode` 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: Podcast Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Podcast.kt:32 — `Podcast`'s public constructor takes `uri`, `title`, `description`, `author`, … 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 `Podcast` 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: PodcastCategoryEntry Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/PodcastCategoryEntry.kt:51 — `PodcastCategoryEntry`'s public constructor takes `podcastUri` 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 `PodcastCategoryEntry` 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: PodcastFollowedEntry Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/PodcastFollowedEntry.kt:42 — `PodcastFollowedEntry`'s public constructor takes `podcastUri` 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 `PodcastFollowedEntry` 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.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×4

Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:712 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt changed 32 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 25 in ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble at line 712. 5 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 27 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-25..2026-10-23, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-25 13:00:43 +05:30' --until='2026-10-23 13:00:43 +05:30' --full-history --no-merges -- Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt:153 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt changed 24 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 21 in UserInputKt.UserInput at line 153. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 22 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-25..2026-10-23, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-25 13:00:43 +05:30' --until='2026-10-23 13:00:43 +05:30' --full-history --no-merges -- Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt changed 12 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 25 in VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer at line 189. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 11 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-25..2026-10-23, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-25 13:00:43 +05:30' --until='2026-10-23 13:00:43 +05:30' --full-history --no-merges -- Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt:66 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in MessageFormatterKt.messageFormatter at line 66. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-25..2026-10-23, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-25 13:00:43 +05:30' --until='2026-10-23 13:00:43 +05:30' --full-history --no-merges -- Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/HomeScreens.kt:672 — JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/HomeScreens.kt:672-683 | JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/HomeScreens.kt:706-717 — 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 `JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/HomeScreens.kt:672` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:794 — Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:794-805 | Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:818-829 — 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 `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:794` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt:191 — Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt:191-202 | Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:173-184 — 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 `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt:191` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.

DM4 · Rich vs anemic model · Anemic entity · ×3

Anemic entity: Category Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Category.kt:32 — `Category` is an aggregate/entity with 2 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Anemic entity: Episode Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Episode.kt:46 — `Episode` is an aggregate/entity with 9 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Anemic entity: Podcast Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/database/model/Podcast.kt:32 — `Podcast` is an aggregate/entity with 6 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.

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

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt:197 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt:197-209 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt:344-356 — 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 `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt:197` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/home/Profile.kt:43 — Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/home/Profile.kt:43-55 | Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/home/search/Results.kt:135-147 — 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 `Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/home/Profile.kt:43` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cyclomatic 25) · ×1

ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cyclomatic 25) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:712 — ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cyclomatic 25) · ×1

VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cyclomatic 25) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189 — VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · UserInputKt.UserInput (cyclomatic 21) · ×1

UserInputKt.UserInput (cyclomatic 21) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt:153 — UserInputKt.UserInput has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · BaseBackdropNode.draw (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

BaseBackdropNode.draw (cyclomatic 16) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BaseBackdropNode.kt:92 — BaseBackdropNode.draw has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cognitive 45) · ×1

ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble (cognitive 45) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:712 — ConversationKt.ChatItemBubble has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 37 (41 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cognitive 45) · ×1

VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer (cognitive 45) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt:189 — VideoPlayerKt.FullScreenVideoPlayer has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (35 pts), boolean chains 10 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseBackdropNode.draw (cognitive 31) · ×1

BaseBackdropNode.draw (cognitive 31) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BaseBackdropNode.kt:92 — BaseBackdropNode.draw has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), error handling 2 (7 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MessageFormatterKt.messageFormatter (cognitive 29) · ×1

MessageFormatterKt.messageFormatter (cognitive 29) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/MessageFormatter.kt:66 — MessageFormatterKt.messageFormatter has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (18 pts), loops 4 (9 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · UserInputKt.UserInput (cognitive 28) · ×1

UserInputKt.UserInput (cognitive 28) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/UserInput.kt:153 — UserInputKt.UserInput has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (23 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 1). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ThemeKt.selectSchemeForContrast (cognitive 24) · ×1

ThemeKt.selectSchemeForContrast (cognitive 24) Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/theme/Theme.kt:270 — ThemeKt.selectSchemeForContrast has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (21 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MeshUtilsKt.rememberUserInputGlowMeshGradientPainter (cognitive 18) · ×1

MeshUtilsKt.rememberUserInputGlowMeshGradientPainter (cognitive 18) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/MeshUtils.kt:46 — MeshUtilsKt.rememberUserInputGlowMeshGradientPainter has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 2 (8 pts), if/else 4 (6 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConversationKt.Message (cognitive 18) · ×1

ConversationKt.Message (cognitive 18) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:530 — ConversationKt.Message has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (17 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

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

REDACTED

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

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:319 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:319-349 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:386-416 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:456-491 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/MagnifierModifier.kt:204-234 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (56 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (56 lines × 2) Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:282 — Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:282-337 | Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:378-433 — 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 `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:282` 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 (26 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (26 lines × 4) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:324 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:324-349 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:391-416 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:466-491 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/MagnifierModifier.kt:209-234 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:324` 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 (21 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:801 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:801-821 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:841-861 — 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 `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/Conversation.kt:801` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (19 lines × 3) Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:144 — Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:144-162 | Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcasts/PodcastsScreen.kt:140-158 | Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/queue/QueueScreen.kt:143-161 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:144` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

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

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:179 — Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:179-194 | Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/queue/QueueScreen.kt:177-192 — 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 `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:179` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:178` calls `SurfaceTransformation` and `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/queue/QueueScreen.kt:176` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

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

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:295 — Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:295-309 | Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:355-369 — 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 `Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt:295` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt:141 — Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt:141-154 | Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt:210-224 — 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 `Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/latest_episodes/LatestEpisodesScreen.kt:141` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt:132 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt:132-145 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt:173-186 — 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 `Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/JetchatDrawer.kt:132` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `key` to `Conversation` in one and `Profile` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 3) Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:200 — Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:200-207 | Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:286-294 | Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:382-390 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:200` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.

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

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/backgrounds/SolarFlareShaderBackground.kt:86 — JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/backgrounds/SolarFlareShaderBackground.kt:86-92 | JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/backgrounds/StripesShaderBackground.kt:78-85 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/WindowInfoUtil.kt:31 — Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/util/WindowInfoUtil.kt:31-35 | Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/utils/WindowStateUtils.kt:36-40 — 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.

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

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:243 — Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:243-252 | Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/MagnifierModifier.kt:153-162 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `node` to `BackdropBlurNode` in one and `BackdropMagnifierNode` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: Jetcaster:core:designsystem — Jetcaster:core:designsystem: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 4 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Suspend function with a blocking request · ×1

Suspend function with a blocking request: fetchPodcast Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/network/PodcastFetcher.kt:89 — `fetchPodcast` suspends, but makes its request with `newCall(…).execute()`, which blocks: its caller's cancellation cannot reach the request, so it runs to its end after whatever wanted it has given up — `withContext(Dispatchers.IO)` moves it off the caller's thread and does not change that. Make the request with a call that suspends: Ktor, OkHttp's `executeAsync()`, or a `suspendCancellableCoroutine` over `enqueue` that cancels the `Call` in `invokeOnCancellation`.

X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) · ×1

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt:373 — `catch (_: Throwable)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.

Minor — 126 finding(s)

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned file · ×111

Orphaned file Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/player/PlayerScreen.kt: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 Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/podcast/PodcastDetailsScreen.kt: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 Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/data/local/LocalEmailsDataProvider.kt: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 Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/theme/Theme.kt: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 JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/post/PostContent.kt: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 Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/theme/Color.kt: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 Jetcaster/core/designsystem/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/designsystem/theme/Color.kt: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 Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/shared/EpisodeListItem.kt: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 Jetcaster/glancewidget/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/glancewidget/JetcasterAppWidget.kt: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 Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/JetcasterApp.kt: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 Jetcaster/mobile/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/home/HomeViewModel.kt: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 Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/home/search/Search.kt: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 Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/components/ReplyAppBars.kt: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 Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/ReplyListContent.kt: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 Jetcaster/glancewidget/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/glancewidget/Colors.kt: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 Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/component/Loading.kt: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 JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/PostCards.kt: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 JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/glance/ui/Post.kt: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 JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/glance/ui/JetnewsGlanceAppWidget.kt: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 Jetcaster/core/domain/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/player/MockEpisodePlayer.kt: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 Jetcaster/tv/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/tv/ui/theme/Color.kt: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 Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/theme/Theme.kt: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 Jetcaster/core/data/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/core/data/network/PodcastFetcher.kt: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 Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/ui/home/search/Categories.kt: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 Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/components/ReplyEmailListItem.kt: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.
+ 86 more in this group — see findings.md.

D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×3

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 9 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayer.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BackdropBlurModifier.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/video/VideoPlayerControls.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/BaseBackdropNode.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/MagnifierModifier.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/blur/MagnifierShader.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/SurfaceViewBlur.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/conversation/JumpToBottom.kt (+1 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #2 — If anonymized user #2 becomes unavailable, 4 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/home/HomeViewModel.kt, JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/JetnewsNavDisplay.kt, JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/ui/navigation/NavigationState.kt, JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/utils/MultipreviewAnnotations.kt. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #3 — If anonymized user #3 becomes unavailable, 3 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/components/MeshUtils.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Typography.kt, Jetchat/app/src/main/java/com/example/compose/jetchat/theme/Themes.kt. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Most significant orphaned file · ×3

Most significant orphaned file JetNews/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetnews/data/posts/impl/PostsData.kt:1 — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file Reply/app/src/main/java/com/example/reply/ui/navigation/ReplyNavigationComponents.kt:1 — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/widget/layout/ImageTextListLayout.kt:1 — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.

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

Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 3 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (19 single-owned of 210 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 210 of the 382 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #4 (1 file(s)), anonymized user #5 (1 file(s)), anonymized user #6 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above. The files folded here: Jetsnack/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetsnack/widget/RecentOrdersWidget.kt, Jetcaster/wear/src/main/java/com/example/jetcaster/ui/components/MediaContent.kt, JetLagged/app/src/main/java/com/example/jetlagged/sleep/JetLaggedHeaderTabs.kt.

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 3 of 20 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 7.6/10. The most over is `JetNews/app` (6950 LoC, 120 module-visible types across 22 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Concentrated knowledge decay · ×1

Concentrated knowledge decay — 114 of 210 significant files have no living knowledge, while the repository is still being changed at a low rate (171 commit(s) in the last 90 days) — so this is one repo-wide knowledge-decay state, not 114 separate risks. Counted over 210 of the 382 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over. The code moved on without the people who understood these files: document them or schedule a read-through before the next change lands in them.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

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

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

No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add 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 26078 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.)

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all suspend functions that make a request accept the coroutine's cancellation · ×1

Not all suspend functions that make a request accept the coroutine's cancellation — Only 0/1 suspend functions that make a cancellable request (Ktor, OkHttp newCall, URL streams) accept the coroutine's cancellation or pass one on, so a request keeps running after whatever wanted it has given up — a screen navigated away from, a disposed widget, a superseded search. In a suspend function, make the request with a call that suspends — Ktor, OkHttp's `executeAsync()`, or a `suspendCancellableCoroutine` that cancels the `Call` — not a blocking `execute()`: `withContext(Dispatchers.IO)` moves the call off the caller's thread but does not make it cancellable; where nothing could ever cancel the call, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against how the function is used.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-62db397474814aa99be3eb1428992200/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-62db397474814aa99be3eb1428992200/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	18	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)	—	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Gradle build (build.gradle/build.gradle.kts) — not scanned yet).	0	—
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	0	—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy	disclosure	—	disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)	—	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Gradle build (build.gradle/build.gradle.kts) — not scanned yet).	0	—

Run 01a16eeb-820b-77fc-93b8-8059234cd48c · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 70% · Strong ·

At a glance — Architecture · 91% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 59% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 34% · Adequate · gated by D13, P3 ·

At a glance — Security · 59% · Adequate · gated by D29 ·

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 60% · Adequate · gated by DM4, DM11 ·

At a glance — Performance · 78% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts