Public report — openwhisk, published 22 Sep 2026. Concrete security findings (which rule fired, in which file, on which line; CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are REDACTED in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Public
Codebase survey Measured under the Code Assurance Index · rubric rubric-2026.09.15 (frozen) · verify this survey Filed cd_5952b01e164841368e324cae99f4b9df Filed 25 September 2026, 05:09 UTC Public

Apache/openwhisk

Measured 22 September 2026, 19:13 UTC

coverage not measuredtest reliability not measuredSupply-chain provenance is not scored
41% Weak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Architecture 61% Adequate Domain Modelling 60% Adequate Security 57% Adequate Readiness 54% Adequate Maturity 49% Weak Accessibility 38% Weak Code Health 36% Weak

REDACTED · 48,374 LoC · 1 projects · rebuild ~0.8 person-years · weakest lens: Code Health (36%)

Findings by grade

81 critical 246 serious 35 minor 37 could not be resolved — could be critical — see Limitations

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
22 September 2026, 19:13 UTC

A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index does not certify, approve or guarantee this codebase; it records a reproducible number and the evidence it was computed from. The standard is authored by Canine Development, who also build Watchdog — its only implementation today. That is said here so the number is checked rather than believed.

Grounded in facts. Every number here is computed, not narrated — reproducible, tool-backed, and traceable to a line of code. How to trust this ▸

49/52dimensions tool-verifieddeterministic · confidence 1.0 · 3 LLM-assisted, advisory
341findings with an exact file:lineof 362 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
52/138dimensions across the health lenses48374 LoC · 1 projects — wide & deep
Chapters

Executive summary

The system holds a weak standing with an overall health score of 41%, indicating a workable asset carrying significant operational risk. While the architecture and domain modeling are reasonably sound, the foundation is fragile. This medium-sized application, comprising nearly 50,000 lines of production code, represents a substantial investment. Rebuilding it from scratch would require approximately 0.8 person-years and cost around €110,000, meaning the current codebase retains considerable value if stabilized. However, the lack of measured test coverage and unreliable test runs create a blind spot, making it difficult to guarantee that changes will not introduce defects or outages.

The primary risk is code maintainability, which scored only 36%. The codebase is dense and difficult to navigate, with oversized files and complex functions that increase the likelihood of bugs during updates. This directly threatens delivery speed, as engineers will spend more time understanding logic than implementing features. Additionally, the frontend lacks type safety, with no files currently typed. This absence of structural checks allows errors to slip into production, increasing the cost of fixing defects later and reducing confidence in new releases. The build pipeline also shows integrity defects, which could compromise supply-chain security if dependencies are not properly monitored.

Despite these issues, the system is not beyond repair. The architecture is coherent, and the domain modeling is clear, suggesting that the core business logic is well-understood. The rebuild cost is manageable, indicating that the system is not overly entangled. These strengths provide a stable base for improvement, provided the immediate risks are addressed. The team can leverage this existing structure to implement changes without starting from zero.

The highest-leverage action is to adopt TypeScript for the frontend. Adding a type-checking step to the build process will immediately reduce runtime errors and improve developer confidence. This should be followed by splitting large files into smaller, focused modules to improve maintainability. These steps offer the best return on effort, stabilizing the system with minimal disruption. While the picture is partial due to unmeasured areas like test reliability, addressing these core issues will significantly reduce risk and improve delivery speed.

Code Health 36% Weak · gated by R1, R3 Architecture 61% Adequate · gated by AX10 Maturity 49% Weak · gated by D34, M4 Readiness 54% Adequate · gated by R6, P3 Security 57% Adequate · gated by D29, D31 Domain Modelling 60% Adequate · gated by DM2 Accessibility 38% Weak · gated by AC1, AC2, AC3
How the score is built — each lens's share of the headline Width is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.
Code Health 36% · 46% weightAccessibility 38% · 25% weightMaturity 49% · 14% weightReadiness 54% · 8% weightSecurity 57% · 4% weightDomain Modelling 60% · 2% weightArchitecture 61% · 1% weight

Raise Code Health 36 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 41 → ~46.

Code composition — where the lines go
Tests 100%
New since the last scan (100+)

276 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-08-05) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required. Showing the first 100; the full set is in the report.

  • D1 · SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cyclomatic 33) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala
  • D1 · FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 31) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala
  • D1 · QueueManager.receive (cyclomatic 31) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala
  • D1 · EtcdWorker.receive (cyclomatic 27) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala
  • D1 · createApi.validateArgs (cyclomatic 27) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js
  • D1 · ContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 26) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala
  • D1 · ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun (cyclomatic 24) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala
  • D1 · DataManagementService.receive (cyclomatic 23) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala
  • D1 · main (cyclomatic 22) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js
  • D1 · apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cyclomatic 21) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D1 · main (cyclomatic 21) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js
  • D1 · FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cyclomatic 19) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala
  • D1 · main (cyclomatic 18) core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js
  • D1 · apigw-utils.getApis (cyclomatic 17) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D1 · Invoker.main (cyclomatic 16) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/Invoker.scala
  • D1 · utils.getApis (cyclomatic 16) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js
  • D2 · SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cognitive 77) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala
  • D2 · ContainerPool.receive (cognitive 57) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala
  • D2 · apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cognitive 56) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D2 · createApi.validateArgs (cognitive 46) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js
  • D2 · QueueManager.receive (cognitive 38) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala
  • D2 · main (cognitive 37) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js
  • D2 · EtcdWorker.receive (cognitive 35) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala
  • D2 · CouchDbRestStore.attachToCouch (cognitive 33) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala
  • D2 · ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun (cognitive 33) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala
  • D2 · main (cognitive 32) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js
  • D2 · DataManagementService.receive (cognitive 31) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala
  • D2 · FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cognitive 31) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala
  • D2 · CouchDBLauncher.run (cognitive 30) core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/CouchDBLauncher.scala
  • D2 · utils.getApis (cognitive 29) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js
  • D2 · FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cognitive 28) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala
  • D2 · apigw-utils.getApis (cognitive 28) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D2 · utils.getTenants (cognitive 25) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js
  • D2 · owperf.mainLoop (cognitive 25) tools/owperf/owperf.js
  • D2 · main (cognitive 25) core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js
  • D2 · YARNContainerInfoActor.receive (cognitive 24) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/yarn/YARNContainerInfoActor.scala
  • D2 · ContainerManager.schedule (cognitive 24) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala
  • D2 · PrimitiveActions.invokeConductor (cognitive 22) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/actions/PrimitiveActions.scala
  • D2 · CommonLoadBalancer.processCompletion (cognitive 22) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala
  • D2 · wskutil.request (cognitive 22) tools/admin/wskutil.py
  • D2 · PackageCollection.checkPackageReadPermission (cognitive 21) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entitlement/PackageCollection.scala
  • D2 · CallbackModule.emit (cognitive 21) ansible/callbacks/logformatter.py
  • D2 · WhiskWebActionsApi.handleMatch (cognitive 19) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/WebActions.scala
  • D2 · WhiskWebActionsApi.extractEntityAndProcessRequest (cognitive 19) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/WebActions.scala
  • D2 · apigw-utils.addApiToGateway (cognitive 19) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D2 · utils.createTenant (cognitive 19) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js
  • D2 · WatcherService.watchBehavior (cognitive 18) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/WatcherService.scala
  • D2 · ActivationServiceImpl.fetchActivation (cognitive 18) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/grpc/ActivationServiceImpl.scala
  • D2 · WhiskConfig.readPropertiesFromFile (cognitive 17) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/WhiskConfig.scala
  • D2 · AttachmentSupport.attachToExternalStore (cognitive 17) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/AttachmentSupport.scala
  • D2 · MongoDBArtifactStore.attachToMongo (cognitive 17) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBArtifactStore.scala
  • D2 · WhiskWebActionsApi.completeRequest (cognitive 17) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/WebActions.scala
  • D2 · ShardingContainerPoolBalancer.publish (cognitive 17) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/ShardingContainerPoolBalancer.scala
  • D2 · DockerContainer.create (cognitive 17) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/docker/DockerContainer.scala
  • D2 · FunctionPullingContainerPool.adjustPrewarmedContainer (cognitive 17) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala
  • D2 · apigw-utils.deleteApiFromGateway (cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D2 · apigw-utils.removeEndpointFromSwaggerApi (cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js
  • D2 · utils.addApiToGateway (cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js
  • D2 · ActivationResponse.processRunResponseContent (cognitive 16) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/ActivationResult.scala
  • D2 · StandaloneOpenWhisk.main (cognitive 16) core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/StandaloneOpenWhisk.scala
  • D2 · replicateDbs.replicateDatabases (cognitive 16) tools/db/replicateDbs.py
  • D2 · owperf.processSample (cognitive 16) tools/owperf/owperf.js
  • D3 · FunctionTooLong: createApi.main core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js
  • D3 · FunctionTooLong: deleteApi.main core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js
  • D4 · Duplicated block (26–27 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (23–26 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (16–18 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdClient.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/http/PoolingRestClient.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/Container.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8–11 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBAsyncStreamSink.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/cosmosdb/CosmosDBArtifactStore.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/AttachmentSupport.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/InvokerSupervision.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/DefaultInvokerServer.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/PekkoContainerClient.scala
  • D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/ElasticSearchDurationChecker.scala

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

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €37,000–€190,000
Cost to rebuild€37,000–€190,000 (0.4–1.2 person-years (615–1,950 h), ~1–2 engineers)
Domain complexityStandard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor0.7× (at 41% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shapeREDACTED · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~0.8 person-years of build effort (about ~€110,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Code Health at 36% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.2) — domain model × a 0.7× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

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

1
Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
+5.3 pts · REDACTED effort · Type Safety
2
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
+5.3 pts · REDACTED effort · Large Files
3
Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
+5.1 pts · REDACTED effort · Cyclomatic Complexity

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Value concentrated against a weak lens · REDACTED · Value at risk
This is a REDACTED asset (~0.8 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Code Health at 36%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
Evidence: valuation: REDACTED, ~0.8 person-years rebuild (48,374 LoC) · weakest lens: Code Health 36%
→ Direct remediation budget at Code Health first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.
Highest-leverage move · REDACTED · Leverage
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up. The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.

Architecture — module dependency matrix

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

123 modules, 270 dependencies. 3 dependency cycles across 24 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 83 more are not drawn.

Module dependency matrix. The row depends on the column; the number is how many type pairs create the dependency. A cell above the diagonal is part of a dependency cycle.
depends on →1 core.entity.SizeUnits2 spi3 core.entity.Attachments4 http5 core.entity.ExecManifest6 core.scheduler7 core.containerpool8 core.containerpool.logging9 core.containerpool.v210 core.loadBalancer11 core.containerpool.docker12 core.entitlement13 core.etcd14 core.service15 standalone16 core.cli17 core.database18 core.entity19 core20 core.connector21 common22 connector.kafka23 connector.lean24 core.ack25 core.containerpool.kubernetes26 core.controller27 core.controller.actions28 core.database.azblob29 core.database.cosmosdb30 core.database.cosmosdb.cache31 core.database.memory32 core.database.mongodb33 core.database.s334 core.invoker35 core.scheduler.container36 core.scheduler.queue37 core.yarn38 core.controller.RestAPIVersion39 core.monitoring.metrics40 core.scheduler.grpc
1 core.entity.SizeUnits
2 spi
3 core.entity.Attachments24
4 http153
5 core.entity.ExecManifest11
6 core.scheduler31122
7 core.containerpool411235219
8 core.containerpool.logging1134203
9 core.containerpool.v241123279
10 core.loadBalancer61214611722
11 core.containerpool.docker7326310517
12 core.entitlement2131439
13 core.etcd521
14 core.service12
15 standalone1322322119
16 core.cli221
17 core.database7331430128
18 core.entity83131414
19 core31
20 core.connector3134110
21 common621
22 connector.kafka41192
23 connector.lean31171
24 core.ack2933
25 core.containerpool.kubernetes3141829
26 core.controller1121213946423
27 core.controller.actions13225
28 core.database.azblob1413
29 core.database.cosmosdb511048
30 core.database.cosmosdb.cache263
31 core.database.memory411788
32 core.database.mongodb1311
33 core.database.s31413
34 core.invoker22342113310
35 core.scheduler.container2961
36 core.scheduler.queue412231361
37 core.yarn417326
38 core.controller.RestAPIVersion157826614
39 core.monitoring.metrics51831
40 core.scheduler.grpc1211
Dependency, pointing down the layeringAbove the diagonal — part of a cycleThe module itself
…core.entity.SizeUnits….apache.openwhisk.spi…re.entity.Attachments…apache.openwhisk.http…e.entity.ExecManifest…nwhisk.core.scheduler…sk.core.containerpool…containerpool.logging…core.containerpool.v2…isk.core.loadBalancer….containerpool.docker…hisk.core.entitlement…e.openwhisk.core.etcd…penwhisk.core.service….openwhisk.standalone…he.openwhisk.core.cli…enwhisk.core.database…openwhisk.core.entity…apache.openwhisk.core…nwhisk.core.connector…ache.openwhisk.common…whisk.connector.kafka…nwhisk.connector.lean…he.openwhisk.core.ack…tainerpool.kubernetes…whisk.core.controller…re.controller.actions….core.database.azblob…ore.database.cosmosdb…tabase.cosmosdb.cache….core.database.memory…core.database.mongodb…hisk.core.database.s3…penwhisk.core.invoker…e.scheduler.container….core.scheduler.queue…e.openwhisk.core.yarn…roller.RestAPIVersion…re.monitoring.metrics…k.core.scheduler.grpc…core.entity.SizeUnits1….apache.openwhisk.spi2…re.entity.Attachments3…apache.openwhisk.http4…e.entity.ExecManifest5…nwhisk.core.scheduler6…sk.core.containerpool7…containerpool.logging8…core.containerpool.v29…isk.core.loadBalancer10….containerpool.docker11…hisk.core.entitlement12…e.openwhisk.core.etcd13…penwhisk.core.service14….openwhisk.standalone15…he.openwhisk.core.cli16…enwhisk.core.database17…openwhisk.core.entity18…apache.openwhisk.core19…nwhisk.core.connector20…ache.openwhisk.common21…whisk.connector.kafka22…nwhisk.connector.lean23…he.openwhisk.core.ack24…tainerpool.kubernetes25…whisk.core.controller26…re.controller.actions27….core.database.azblob28…ore.database.cosmosdb29…tabase.cosmosdb.cache30….core.database.memory31…core.database.mongodb32…hisk.core.database.s333…penwhisk.core.invoker34…e.scheduler.container35….core.scheduler.queue36…e.openwhisk.core.yarn37…roller.RestAPIVersion38…re.monitoring.metrics39…k.core.scheduler.grpc402415311311224112352191134203411232796121461172273263105172131439521121322322119221733143012883131414313134110621411923117129333141829112121394642313225141351104826341178813111413223421133102961412231361417326157826614518311211+83 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 36% · Weak · gated by R1, R3 ·

The Good
D1 · Scala Cyclomatic Complexity 7.3 D3 · Scala God Classes 9.0 D4 · Scala Code Duplication 9.6 D17 · Scala Explicit Debt 10.0 R10 · React / TS Code Duplication 7.2 R7 · React / TS Dead Code 10.0
The Bad
D2 · Scala Cognitive Complexity 6.3
The Ugly
R1 · React / TS Type Safety 0.0 R2 · React / TS Cyclomatic Complexity 4.8 R3 · React / TS Large Files 0.0

At a glance — Architecture · 61% · Adequate · gated by AX10 ·

The Good
D6 · Scala Cohesion (LCOM4) 9.8 D26 · Scala Project Cohesion 10.0 D35 · Scala Change Coupling 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 R9 · React / TS Circular Imports 10.0
The Bad
D5 · Scala Coupling 6.9
The Ugly
AX10 · Repo Code composition 0.0

At a glance — Maturity · 49% · Weak · gated by D34, M4 ·

The Good
D15 · Scala Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D16 · Scala Bus Factor 9.8 D19 · Scala Documentation Quality 8.0 D21 · Scala Naming Consistency 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.3 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0
The Bad
M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 5.0
The Ugly
D34 · Scala Knowledge Freshness 1.9 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 1.0

At a glance — Readiness · 54% · Adequate · gated by R6, P3 ·

The Good
D14 · Scala License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0 R5 · React / TS Dependency Freshness 9.9 R8 · React / TS Dependency Hygiene 8.0
The Bad
D13 · Scala REDACTED Scanning 5.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0
The Ugly
P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 3.0 R6 · React / TS Tooling 3.4

At a glance — Security · 57% · Adequate · gated by D29, D31 ·

The Good
D28 · Scala Secrets (history) 7.0 D30 · Scala Dependency Vulnerabilities 10.0 D43 · Scala Malicious Dependencies 10.0
The Bad
D44 · Scala Platform End-of-Life 6.0 S1 · Repo Web-Security Posture 6.0
The Ugly
D29 · Scala Static Analysis (SAST) 0.0 D31 · Scala IaC & Container Security 0.0

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 60% · Adequate · gated by DM2 ·

The Good
DM6 · Repo Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary 10.0 DM8 · Repo Value-object opportunities 10.0
The Ugly
DM2 · Repo Strongly-typed ids 3.0

At a glance — Accessibility · 38% · Weak · gated by AC1, AC2, AC3 ·

The Good
AC5 · Repo ARIA correctness 10.0 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 10.0
The Ugly
AC1 · Repo Text alternatives 1.0 AC2 · Repo Forms & labels 3.9 AC3 · Repo Page structure 2.7 AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration108REDACTED / Critical
A03:2021 — Injection59REDACTED / Critical
A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures5REDACTED / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by introducing TypeScript to the frontend build to establish type safety, prioritizing the conversion of high-traffic modules. Simultaneously, split the three largest files into smaller, focused modules and reduce cyclomatic complexity in branch-heavy functions to improve maintainability. Address code duplication by extracting shared logic or types where appropriate, and ensure all media elements have proper text alternatives for accessibility.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.+5.3 ptsREDACTEDType Safety
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.+5.3 ptsREDACTEDLarge Files
Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.+5.1 ptsREDACTEDCyclomatic Complexity
Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.+4.8 ptsREDACTEDCode Duplication
Add a text alternative — alt on images (alt="" for purely decorative ones), a title or aria-label on meaningful svg, an aria-label or inner fallback content on canvas, and a captions <track> on video.+4.5 ptsREDACTEDText alternatives
Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.+4.5 ptsREDACTEDPage structure
Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.+4.5 ptsREDACTEDForms & labels
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain your project already uses: assert accessibility in your UI test suite with your toolkit's own matcher (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.+4.4 ptsREDACTEDA11y enforcement

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 102 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 7% slop · 63% mixed · 30% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED0.0SlopIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED0.0SlopIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED2.4SlopIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED3.0SlopIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED3.0SlopIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED3.6SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED3.7SlopIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedREDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED
core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala5.6MixedCyclomatic Complexity: FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cyclomatic 19)
REDACTED5.8MixedIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED5.8MixedIaC & Container Security: REDACTED IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED5.9MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): REDACTED: REDACTED

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 — 81

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 — 246

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 — 35

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

Could not be resolved — 37

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. 49 of 52 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 — 52 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D13D14D15D16D17D19D21D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D43D44AC1AC2AC3AC5AC6AC7AX10AX3AX4DM2DM6DM8M1M2M3M4P1P3P4P6R1R10R2R3R5R6R7R8R9S1

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions
  1. Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 341 of 362 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0ca89-cbd5-7d74-b9ca-3f0c84e6ac38.

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.

  • D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test reliability NOT MEASURED: the test run produced no results for any test tier, so no test ever ran and flakiness could not be exercised. The cause could not be attributed, so it is excluded from the score rather than read as an absence of tests.
  • 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. Dependency Hygiene ran out of its 5-minute budget before it had finished, so what it reports here is a floor rather than a complete count. The rows above are real and stand; what is not known is how many more there are. This is a limit of the analysis run, not a finding about this repository.
  • D14 License Compliance — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. This repository declares a Gradle build (build.gradle/build.gradle.kts), but the licence verdict published here was taken over its NuGet package dependencies. Nothing was read about its Gradle dependencies' licensing in either direction, and a clean score on this card must not be read as covering them.
  • D17 Explicit Debt — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The 0 deducted marker(s) and the 0.0/KLoC density on this row were taken over this repository's .NET projects ALONE: .scala (47,081 lines, 96% of production source) went unread, because every marker collector on this path is reached through a C# workspace. A read-only sweep of that source finds at least 33 task marker(s) (TODO/FIXME/HACK/XXX) across 25 file(s) that this score does not count — a floor, since only line comments are read there and D17's other eight marker kinds (suppressions, NoWarn, editorconfig severities, empty catches, commented-out code, Obsolete, dead code, preprocessor branches) need a compiler we do not have for that language. The debt in that source is UNMEASURED — its absence from the score above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that the code carries none.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Tools/actionProxy/Dockerfile carries no `FROM` instruction, so it declares no build stage and every REDACTED rule this engine owns — the runtime-hardening, key-material, mutable-clone, no-op-shim, build-context, trust-anchor, install-guard, setuid and world-writable-path rules — is outside its own premise there and returned nothing. That silence is deliberate and correct: with no base image there is no image to reason about. It is reported here because it is NOT the same fact as a clean file, and coverage is stated as 42 of 43 Infrastructure-as-Code manifest(s) fully judged rather than as 100%. The vendor scanners (trivy, checkov) do read these files and their findings above stand; only this engine's own stage-keyed rules are absent. No owner action: a build file with no FROM is a legitimate include fragment.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. IL NOT MEASURED: the analyzer's own build of this repository failed for an ENVIRONMENT reason (exit 1) — MSBuild's engine or the CLR gave up, or our image does not carry the SDK band/targeting pack this repository needs. This is OUR limitation, not a defect in the repo, and it is not a statement that this repository fails to build. D18 owns the question of whether this repository builds; it was not answered here.
  • 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.
  • C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
  • C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
  • C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
  • C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
  • 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.
  • ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

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 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • 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").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • 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.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
  • AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
  • AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • 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 Complexity7.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

23 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide at 33.

SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cyclomatic 33)core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala:49
FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 31)core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:197
QueueManager.receive (cyclomatic 31)core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:103
EtcdWorker.receive (cyclomatic 27)common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:53
createApi.validateArgs (cyclomatic 27)core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:246

+ 11 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cyclomatic 33) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 31) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 QueueManager.receive (cyclomatic 31) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with QueueManager.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity6.3 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

61 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide at 77.

SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cognitive 77)core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala:49
ContainerPool.receive (cognitive 57)core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:116
apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cognitive 56)core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:96
createApi.validateArgs (cognitive 46)core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:246
QueueManager.receive (cognitive 38)core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:103

+ 41 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cognitive 77) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 ContainerPool.receive (cognitive 57) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with ContainerPool.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cognitive 56) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with apigw-utils.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D3 · God Classes9.0 / 10Stronggated by 10 serious findings✓ 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 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

10 god class(es) detected.

FileTooLong: v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala · ×6core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala
TooManyMethods: Messages · ×2common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/http/ErrorResponse.scala:38
FunctionTooLong: createApi.main · ×2core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:58

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala, MemoryQueue.scala, ContainerProxy.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with ErrorResponse.scala, StandaloneOpenWhisk.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 2 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with createApi.js, deleteApi.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  4. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication9.6 / 10Stronggated by 44 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 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

44 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×5common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:551
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×4core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:351
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×3common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:315
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×3core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:389
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×3common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/PekkoContainerClient.scala:243

+ 20 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 5 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with WhiskAction.scala, InvokerSupervision.scala, FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with ApiUtils.scala, CommonLoadBalancer.scala, ContainerPool.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with CouchDbRestStore.scala, WhiskAction.scala, PoolingRestClient.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D5 · Coupling6.9 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

What to do

  1. 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.8 / 10Stronggated by 2 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

2 of 98 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

REDACTED cohesion: FunctionPullingContainerProxy (LCOM4 5) · ×2core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:181

What to do

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 86 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 1 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 85 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution. ★ COVERAGE OF THIS VERDICT: it grades this repository's NuGet package dependencies and nothing else. The repository also declares a Gradle build (build.gradle/build.gradle.kts), and the licences of those dependencies were NOT read by this pass — a gap in this engine's coverage, not a statement about them. So this result says the graded closure carries no banned licence; it does NOT say this repository's licensing is clear.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D16 · Bus Factor9.8 / 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 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is gradle/docker.gradle. Counted over 193 of the 295 production source files in this repository: 67 are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over, and the remaining 35 have no attributable history left to measure.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D17 · Explicit Debt10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

0 deducted debt markers + 0 dead symbols across 0 LoC in the .NET projects (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Measured on the .NET source only: .scala (96% of production source) was not read, and carries at least 33 uncounted task marker(s) in 25 file(s).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md.

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

OpenWhisk documentation is comprehensive: a single Apache-style license banner plus an overview of what OpenWhisk does (distributed event-driven compute service) and how to run it locally on-prem or in the cloud; detailed usage for running tests via gradle/ansible commands with explanation of required setup (OpenWhisk already running, auth/server URLs); a dedicated proposals directory explaining how to submit POEM enhancements; and Ubuntu-specific setup covering installing git, cloning, changing directories, and installing Open JDK 8. The architecture/design docs are also present but not shown in the summary. The documentation is comprehensive: a LICENSE file plus an overview of owperf (warm latency/throughput benchmark with rules profiling, tunables, master-apart mode), installation for Docker on Mac and Homebrew, pre-commit hooks for Scala formatting, a data-store configure guide covering CouchDB and Cloudant, and administrative commands for REDACTED users, namespaces, blocking, and limits. The architecture/design docs are also present (44 markdown files). It is clear and complete but the outline shows that it is an internal toolset with no overview of what each module does or how they fit together. Clear documentation covering both usage (the Apache OpenWhisk Performance Tests suite) and installation of standalone server, Docker-machine setup, GitHub secrets for workflows, and a user-events service. The architecture/design docs are also present but not shown in the summary. There is no licence statement in any document body. The documentation is strong: it states a licensing agreement (Apache 2.0), describes what the project does (YARNContainerFactory for action containers within a YARN cluster that does not affect OpenWhisk deployment), and provides an Enable table with property names, requiredness, details, and examples. It also begins to cover HA, security, and known issues in its outline but is cut by the scanner before those sections appear.

Documentation: no installation or build instructions · ×2README.md

What to do

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

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

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 4 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 of 1 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

D28 · Secrets (history)7.0 / 10Adequategated by 3 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: REDACTED scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged REDACTED. 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 7.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 finding(s): 0 critical, 3 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.0 / 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

59 finding(s): 0 critical, 51 high, 5 medium, 3 low. 7 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 2 file(s) — `core/standalone/start.sh` (lines 27–30), `gradlew` (line 177) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 7 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 44 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 7 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (51 issue-level, 44 of them charged here).
  2. Resolve the 5 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

No known-vulnerable dependencies in any ecosystem this repository declares.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 98% · ceiling Documented

108 finding(s): 0 critical, 21 high, 70 medium, 17 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 70 REDACTED IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (29), REDACTED (13), REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (70 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 21 REDACTED IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (12), REDACTED (5), REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (21 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 17 REDACTED IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (11), REDACTED (4), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (17 recommendation-level).

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness1.9 / 10Critical✓ 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 1.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

184 of 228 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala. Counted over 228 of the 295 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Most significant orphaned file · ×3core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala
Concentrated knowledge decay

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala, MemoryQueue.scala, ContainerProxy.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
  2. 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.

D35 · Change Coupling10.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Strongest change-coupling: Packages.scala↔PackageCollection.scala 60%

Change coupling: Packages.scala ↔ PackageCollection.scalacore/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/Packages.scala

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with Packages.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

D44 · Platform End-of-Life6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

End-of-life runtime: .NET netcoreapp2.2

What to do

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

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

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AC1 · Text alternatives1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

  • An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative. — REDACTED:786

What to do

  • Add a text alternative — alt on images (alt="" for purely decorative ones), a title or aria-label on meaningful svg, an aria-label or inner fallback content on canvas, and a captions <track> on video.
AC2 · Forms & labels3.9 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.

Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

  • This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. (×3) — core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:87, core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:93, core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:121

What to do

  • Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
AC3 · Page structure2.7 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

  • The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en"). — core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:21
  • No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:21

What to do

  • Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC5 · ARIA correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: role values checked against the WAI-ARIA role set (abstract/invalid flagged), required ARIA state for a role, and aria-hidden on a focusable element. Deterministic, role/attribute level.

Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

AC6 · Visual & motion safety10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS literals are read (hex/rgb/hsl/named), never computed/runtime/external-CDN colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup/CSS scan: inline outline:none/0, literal inline colour/background contrast against the 4.5:1 AA floor, and <style>-block animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard. Deterministic but PARTIAL — only inline styles and in-repo CSS literals are visible.

Coverage: Population: styled elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx), plus in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files and CSS-in-JS literals. Colour contrast is computed from LITERAL colour pairs only (hex/rgb/hsl/named, including var() tokens and Tailwind neutral utilities) — computed, runtime-themed and external-CDN colour is never resolved, so this is a partial read of contrast by construction. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

  • No accessibility enforcement found — no accessibility linting at author time and no automated accessibility check in tests or CI. Add your UI toolkit's own accessibility assertion to the test suite (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in the pipeline. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

  • Enforce accessibility in the toolchain your project already uses: assert accessibility in your UI test suite with your toolkit's own matcher (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.
AX10 · Code composition0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DM2 · Strongly-typed ids3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — How much of the domain uses strongly-typed ids vs raw Guid/string/int — adoption curve, not all-or-nothing.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): strongly-typed id adoption on domain entities/events; raw Guid/int/string ids counted versus wrapped types. An id wrapper is recognised by VALUE SEMANTICS, not by being a struct — a record struct, a record class (`record ApartmentId(Guid Value)`) or a class declared by a typed-id base (`class MemberId : TypedIdValueBase`) all count, while a plain mutable class (reference equality) and a verb-phrase query record (`GetCustomerById`) do not. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

Coverage: Population: id-like members by *Id/*Key NAME suffix; strongly-typed-ID shape then checked semantically — non-suffixed identifiers are not seen.

  • `WatchEndpointOperation.watchKey` is a raw `String` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `String`, in whatever form your language spells that.

What to do

  • Adopt strongly-typed ids across the domain — finish the migration or document the boundary; primitive ids invite transposed-argument bugs.
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.

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.

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

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

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

What to do

  • Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
  • Add a README to the 1 of 1 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation5.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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 significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
M3 · Folder & project structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

M4 · Documentation accuracy1.0 / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

  • README claims standalone OpenWhisk is a full-featured stack but the evidence shows only the standalone/standalone/README.md project exists — searched for: `Standalone Stack`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, REDACTED); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: README claims standalone OpenWhisk is a full-featured stack but the evidence shows only the standalone/standalone/README.md project exists.
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.

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 scalafix or scapegoat (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 30352 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: scalafix or scapegoat — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
  • Dependabot is configured but does not watch `nuget`, `npm`, `gradle` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
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.

  • Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

What to do

  • Add a `healthcheck:` to the served compose service — probing the endpoint it already answers on where it has one — with `depends_on: condition: service_healthy` on whatever waits for it, and keep the deployed image tag immutable and recorded so rolling back is re-pointing at the previous tag rather than rebuilding.
  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

R1 · Type Safety0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.

Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.

  • 0 typed · 8 plain JS — the untyped files are core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js, core/routemgmt/common/utils.js, core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js, core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js, core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js, tests/dat/actions/zippedaction/index.js (+2 more).

What to do

  • Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
R10 · Code Duplication7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.

Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.

  • core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:53 · core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:58 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 736 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:53
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:346 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:334 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:346
  • core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:102 · core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:171 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 292 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:102
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:274 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:261 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:274
  • core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:121 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:317 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:121
  • core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:149 · core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:206 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:149
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:671 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:631 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:671
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:866 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:737 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:866
  • core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:56 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:110 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:200 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:250 · +1 more site(s) not listed — all 5 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:56
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:221 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:211 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:221
  • tools/owperf/owperf.js:205 · tools/owperf/owperf.js:226 — 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. — tools/owperf/owperf.js:205
  • core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:99 · core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:66 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:99
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:609 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:585 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:609
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:1037 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:763 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:1037
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:639 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:612 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:639
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:311 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:296 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:311
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:826 · core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:837 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:826
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:254 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:47 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:254
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:334 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:67 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:120 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:316 — the 4 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:334
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:708 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:669 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:708
  • core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:230 · core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:205 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:230
  • core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:100 · core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:136 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:100
  • core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:139 · core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:194 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:139
  • core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/actions/playground-delete.js:21 · core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/actions/playground-fetch.js:21 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/actions/playground-delete.js:21
  • core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:210 · core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:263 · core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:321 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:210

What to do

  • Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity4.8 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.

Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.

  • validateArgs has cyclomatic complexity 27 and cognitive complexity 46; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:246
  • (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 56; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:97
  • main has cyclomatic complexity 16 and cognitive complexity 20; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:58
  • processSample has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — tools/owperf/owperf.js:540
  • mainLoop has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 25; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — tools/owperf/owperf.js:337
  • (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 22; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:321
  • (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 23; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. (×2) — core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:110, core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:306
  • (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. (×2) — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:210, core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:263
  • main has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:48
  • (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:56
  • main has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:46

What to do

  • Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
R3 · Large Files0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.

Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.

  • 3 file(s) over 400 lines (counted as significant lines — blank lines excluded — over production source only, tests excluded), largest first: core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js (997), core/routemgmt/common/utils.js (734), tools/owperf/owperf.js (713).

What to do

  • Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
R5 · Dependency Freshness9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — How outdated the npm dependencies are (a maturity signal). JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities).

Method: npm dependency staleness from manifest/registry metadata (a maturity signal; JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30, which answers dependency vulnerabilities for every ecosystem). Deterministic.

What to do

  • Bump outdated dependencies to current versions to limit upgrade debt.
R6 · Tooling3.4 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.

Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.

  • test ✓ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

What to do

  • Add eslint as package.json scripts and run them in CI.
R7 · Dead Code10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).

Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.

R8 · Dependency Hygiene8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.

Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.

  • Declared in tools/owperf/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it. (×3)

What to do

  • Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.

Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.

S1 · Web-Security Posture6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Only what this repository's own non-C# files could be read for was assessed — markup this repository SHIPS is scored for third-party script integrity whether or not the repository serves it itself, since a page handed to a consumer runs in that consumer’s origin — and because this repository commits the configuration that serves its own HTTP surface, that configuration could be read in full for the security response headers it sets. Nothing else in this dimension was assessed: the transport, cookie, input-validation and crypto controls are read from a source model that was not loaded for this repository’s language, so their absence here is not a finding about this repository.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. Deterministic.

  • `https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ace/1.4.2/ace.js` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. 3 such include(s) across the repository's markup. — core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:28
  • No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. This is reported because `application.conf` is committed to this repository and declares the server that serves it, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.) — common/scala/src/main/resources/application.conf:40

What to do

  • Pin third-party scripts and verify them: name an exact version in the URL and add an `integrity="sha384-…"` hash alongside `crossorigin="anonymous"` (both are required — an integrity hash on a cross-origin script without `crossorigin` is not evaluated, it blocks the script). Where the vendor ships a continuously-updated loader and publishes no stable hash (tag managers, analytics, chat widgets), Subresource Integrity is not available: constrain it instead with a `Content-Security-Policy` that names the exact origins allowed to execute, and drop the script from the pages that do not need it. Where the page is shipped inside a package that others host, prefer vendoring the asset and serving it from the app’s own origin, so no consumer inherits a third-party dependency they did not choose.
  • Set security response headers on the surface this repository serves: an `add_header` directive per header in the nginx/Caddy/Apache config, a `_headers` / `vercel.json` / `netlify.toml` entry for a static host, or `helmet()` in the HTTP server. `Content-Security-Policy` is the one that pays for itself first — it is what contains an injected script once one reaches the page — followed by `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff` and a frame policy (`X-Frame-Options: DENY`, or CSP `frame-ancestors`). Where the app is served from a build container, the header configuration belongs in the image beside the built assets, so it ships with them rather than depending on where it lands.

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 13 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (24%; ≈26% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 42 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

DimensionWCAG 2.2 A/AA criteriaCoverage
AC1 · Text alternatives1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness4.1.2Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety1.4.3, 2.4.7Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcementenforcement — no page criterionEnforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 42 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

Reference — by lens

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

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health36%Weak — gated by R1, R3Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture61%Adequate — gated by AX10Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity49%Weak — gated by D34, M4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness54%Adequate — gated by R6, P3Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security57%Adequate — gated by D29, D31Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling60%Adequate — gated by DM2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility38%Weak — gated by AC1, AC2, AC3Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
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.

  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 81 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.

  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — no DI registrations detected
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — no singleton implementations detected
  • 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.
  • C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D10 Test Quality — ~64852 lines of test source are present (.scala) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not measured — no test run produced results
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency Hygiene incomplete (time budget)
  • D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution, but this repository's production source is mostly .groovy, .py, .scala — the .NET project files present are an immaterial minority — so the dimension does not apply.
  • D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — At only 48k LoC across one project there is no scale to justify any boundaries. No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D27 Navigability — symbol resolution incomplete — navigability not assessed
  • 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.
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release). Build integrity and workflow-token hygiene are reported below: they describe what the CI runs and the token it runs with, neither of which is affected by whether the pipeline ships an artifact.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — IL not measured — the analyzer's build of the target did not succeed
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
  • D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.scala) 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
  • DM11 Constructible invalid state — no entities detected — construction-time invariants not assessable
  • DM12 Ambient inputs in the domain — no domain-layer types detected — ambient-input check not applicable
  • DM3 Integration-event coupling — no integration events detected — coupling check not applicable
  • DM4 Rich vs anemic model — no data-bearing entities detected — rich-vs-anemic model not assessable
  • DM5 Encapsulated state — no domain entities found — DM5 grades how entities protect their state, and this repository declares none
  • 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 — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • 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# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — reported, not scored — this repository's C# declares no analysable method bodies (a constants, record or DTO assembly), and this score is a density of unfinished work per method, which has no denominator here. The file-level signals below were still collected and are shown in full
  • 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 — Observability was not assessed: this check reads a source model that does not carry this repository's product — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of a logging idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repo lacks structured logging (it may log through its own ecosystem's logger). This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not measured — the application kind could not be determined for this repo
  • P8 Schema migrations — no EF Core usage detected
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (`addSbtPlugin("org.scoverage" % "sbt-scoverage" % "<version>")` in `project/plugins.sbt`, then `sbt clean coverage test coverageReport`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Performance was not assessed: this lens reads a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this lens does not yet model or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository — in particular it is NOT a statement that this repo is unpackaged or performance-careless.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Performance was not assessed: this lens reads a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this lens does not yet model or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository — in particular it is NOT a statement that this repo is unpackaged or performance-careless.
  • PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Performance was not assessed: this lens reads a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this lens does not yet model or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository — in particular it is NOT a statement that this repo is unpackaged or performance-careless.
  • R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
  • R4 Test Coverage — 1 test file(s) reach none of 12 production file(s) via imports — exercised outside the JS import graph (integration/bundled), not import-reachable
  • X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • 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 — 81 finding(s)
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×51
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 26 more in this group — see findings.md.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · REDACTED IaC · ×21
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC2 · Forms & labels · <select> without a programmatic label · ×2
  • <select> without a programmatic label core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:87 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
  • <select> without a programmatic label core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:93 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
AC1 · Text alternatives · <img> without a text alternative · ×1
  • <img> without a text alternative REDACTED:786 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
AC2 · Forms & labels · <textarea> without a programmatic label · ×1
  • <textarea> without a programmatic label core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:121 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
AC3 · Page structure · <html> without a lang · ×1
  • <html> without a lang core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:21 — The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en").
D13 · REDACTED Scanning · Leaked secret · ×1
  • REDACTED
Serious — 246 finding(s)
D31 · IaC & Container Security · REDACTED IaC · ×70
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 45 more in this group — see findings.md.
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×6
  • FileTooLong: v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala — FileTooLong — 993 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 78% of them inside a single declaration: FunctionPullingContainerProxy (181-1270). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 493 over it, 1.99× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
  • FileTooLong: queue/MemoryQueue.scala core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala — FileTooLong — 915 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 415 over it, 1.83× 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: containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala — FileTooLong — 778 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 63% of them inside a single declaration: ContainerProxy (247-967). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 278 over it, 1.56× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
  • FileTooLong: v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala — FileTooLong — 596 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 96 over it, 1.19× 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: queue/QueueManager.scala core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala — FileTooLong — 559 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 77% of them inside a single declaration: QueueManager (64-670). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 59 over it, 1.12× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
  • FileTooLong: common/apigw-utils.js core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js — FileTooLong — 525 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded; the length bar is tripled for a single-responsibility module of 4 or fewer top-level units). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 25 over it, 1.05× 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.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×5
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×5
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:551 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:551-558 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:630-637 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:551` 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.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/InvokerSupervision.scala:191 — core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/InvokerSupervision.scala:191-198 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/InvokerHealthManager.scala:298-305 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1371 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1371-1378 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:643-650 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1371` 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 (8 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/DefaultInvokerServer.scala:47 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/DefaultInvokerServer.scala:47-54 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/FPCInvokerServer.scala:55-62 — before extracting anything, compare `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/DefaultInvokerServer.scala` and `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/FPCInvokerServer.scala` as WHOLE FILES: 87% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/DefaultInvokerServer.scala:47` 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:1025 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:1025-1032 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1334-1341 — 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.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:351 — core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:351-360 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:410-419 — 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 `core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:351` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:149 — core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:149-163 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/FPCPoolBalancer.scala:235-244 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:149` 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 (10 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:583 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:583-592 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:802-811 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:583` 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 (10 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:748 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:748-757 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1000-1009 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:315 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:315-327 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:349-361 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:315` 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.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:522 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:522-534 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/WhiskAction.scala:601-613 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/http/PoolingRestClient.scala:121 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/http/PoolingRestClient.scala:121-133 | core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/CouchDBLauncher.scala:248-260 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/http/PoolingRestClient.scala:121` 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 (12 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:389 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:389-400 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:540-551 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:358 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:358-369 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:410-421 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:358` 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) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala:875 — core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala:875-886 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:621-632 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/PekkoContainerClient.scala:243 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/PekkoContainerClient.scala:243-249 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/PekkoContainerClient.scala:268-274 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/PekkoContainerClient.scala:243` 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.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/DocumentHandler.scala:257 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/DocumentHandler.scala:257-263 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBViewMapper.scala:162-168 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:252 — core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:252-258 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/FPCPoolBalancer.scala:338-344 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:252` 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 (5 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:154 — REDACTED:154-158 | REDACTED:308-312 — 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 `REDACTED:154` 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 (5 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:191 — core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:191-195 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:334-338 — 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 `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:191` 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 (5 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala:311 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala:311-315 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/s3/S3AttachmentStore.scala:182-186 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala:311` 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (28 lines × 2 locations) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (28 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:274 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:274 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:261 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (28 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:121 — core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:121 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:317 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (28 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:149 — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:149 · core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:206 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:708 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:708 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:669 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:230 — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:230 · core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:205 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:100 — core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:100 · core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:136 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×2
  • TooManyMethods: Messages common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/http/ErrorResponse.scala:38 — TooManyMethods — 49 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 19 over it, 1.63× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
  • TooManyMethods: StandaloneOpenWhisk core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/StandaloneOpenWhisk.scala:162 — TooManyMethods — 32 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×2
  • FunctionTooLong: createApi.main core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:58 — FunctionTooLong — main runs 125 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 25 over it, 1.25× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: deleteApi.main core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:46 — FunctionTooLong — main runs 109 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 9 over it, 1.09× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:107 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:107-122 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:125-141 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:106` calls `WatchEndpoint`, `Set` and `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:124` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:663 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:663-678 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:884-900 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:663` 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 (17 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:303 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:303-319 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:322-338 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:264 — core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:264-280 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:285-301 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/Container.scala:133 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/Container.scala:133-143 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/Container.scala:187-197 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/Container.scala:133` 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.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:233 — core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:233-244 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/FPCPoolBalancer.scala:308-318 — 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 (6 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/ElasticSearchDurationChecker.scala:208 — core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/ElasticSearchDurationChecker.scala:208-213 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/ElasticSearchDurationChecker.scala:221-226 — 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 `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/ElasticSearchDurationChecker.scala:208` 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 (6 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/DocumentHandler.scala:151 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/DocumentHandler.scala:151-156 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/DocumentHandler.scala:250-255 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · REDACTED cohesion · ×2
  • REDACTED cohesion: FunctionPullingContainerProxy (LCOM4 5) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:181 — FunctionPullingContainerProxy's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
  • REDACTED cohesion: InvokerHealthManager (LCOM4 4) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/InvokerHealthManager.scala:39 — InvokerHealthManager's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:221 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:221 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:211 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) tools/owperf/owperf.js:205 — tools/owperf/owperf.js:205 · tools/owperf/owperf.js:226 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:609 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:609 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:585 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:1037 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:1037 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:763 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:311 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:311 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:296 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:826 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:826 · core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:837 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:139 — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:139 · core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:194 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/actions/playground-delete.js:21 — core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/actions/playground-delete.js:21 · core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/actions/playground-fetch.js:21 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 23) · ×2
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 23) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:110 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 23; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 23) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:306 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 23; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 16) · ×2
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 16) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:210 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 16) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:263 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×1
  • Page without a main landmark core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:21 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>.
AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
  • Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no accessibility linting at author time and no automated accessibility check in tests or CI. Add your UI toolkit's own accessibility assertion to the test suite (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in the pipeline. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cyclomatic 33) · ×1
  • SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cyclomatic 33) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala:49 — SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide has cyclomatic complexity 33 (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 · FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 31) · ×1
  • FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 31) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:197 — FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QueueManager.receive (cyclomatic 31) · ×1
  • QueueManager.receive (cyclomatic 31) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:103 — QueueManager.receive has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · EtcdWorker.receive (cyclomatic 27) · ×1
  • EtcdWorker.receive (cyclomatic 27) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:53 — EtcdWorker.receive has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · createApi.validateArgs (cyclomatic 27) · ×1
  • createApi.validateArgs (cyclomatic 27) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:246 — createApi.validateArgs has cyclomatic complexity 27 (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 · ContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 26) · ×1
  • ContainerPool.receive (cyclomatic 26) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:116 — ContainerPool.receive has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun (cyclomatic 24) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:776 — ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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 · DataManagementService.receive (cyclomatic 23) · ×1
  • DataManagementService.receive (cyclomatic 23) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:69 — DataManagementService.receive has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · main (cyclomatic 22) · ×1
  • main (cyclomatic 22) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:46 — main has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Of this number, 11 points are the body's own statements and 11 belong to 10 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cyclomatic 21) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:96 — apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 21 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 97). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · main (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • main (cyclomatic 21) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:58 — main has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). Of this number, 16 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 13 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cyclomatic 19) · ×1
  • FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cyclomatic 19) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1044 — FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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 · main (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • main (cyclomatic 18) core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:48 — main has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 6 belong to 6 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · apigw-utils.getApis (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.getApis (cyclomatic 17) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:290 — apigw-utils.getApis has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 5 of the 17 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 321). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Invoker.main (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • Invoker.main (cyclomatic 16) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/Invoker.scala:105 — Invoker.main has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · utils.getApis (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • utils.getApis (cyclomatic 16) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:277 — utils.getApis has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 5 of the 16 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 306). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cognitive 77) · ×1
  • SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide (cognitive 77) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/SchedulingDecisionMaker.scala:49 — SchedulingDecisionMaker.decide has cognitive complexity 77 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 29 (62 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 7 (nesting depth added 38). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ContainerPool.receive (cognitive 57) · ×1
  • ContainerPool.receive (cognitive 57) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:116 — ContainerPool.receive has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (51 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 34). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cognitive 56) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger (cognitive 56) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:96 — apigw-utils.validateFinalSwagger has cognitive complexity 56 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (37 pts), loops 4 (13 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 36). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 56 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 97). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · createApi.validateArgs (cognitive 46) · ×1
  • createApi.validateArgs (cognitive 46) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:246 — createApi.validateArgs has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (40 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QueueManager.receive (cognitive 38) · ×1
  • QueueManager.receive (cognitive 38) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:103 — QueueManager.receive has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (20 pts), match/switch 8 (16 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 15). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · main (cognitive 37) · ×1
  • main (cognitive 37) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:46 — main has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (29 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 13). Most of this is not in the body itself: 13 of the 37 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 10 function literals inside it that branch (lines 113, 183, 103, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EtcdWorker.receive (cognitive 35) · ×1
  • EtcdWorker.receive (cognitive 35) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:53 — EtcdWorker.receive has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 11 (26 pts), if/else 4 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CouchDbRestStore.attachToCouch (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • CouchDbRestStore.attachToCouch (cognitive 33) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:378 — CouchDbRestStore.attachToCouch has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 7 (23 pts), match/switch 2 (8 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 22). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun (cognitive 33) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:776 — ContainerProxy.initializeAndRun has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (21 pts), match/switch 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 6). 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 · main (cognitive 32) · ×1
  • main (cognitive 32) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:58 — main has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 20 (25 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 7). Of this number, 20 points are the body's own statements and 12 belong to 13 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · DataManagementService.receive (cognitive 31) · ×1
  • DataManagementService.receive (cognitive 31) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/DataManagementService.scala:69 — DataManagementService.receive has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (21 pts), match/switch 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cognitive 31) · ×1
  • FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive (cognitive 31) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:197 — FunctionPullingContainerPool.receive has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (17 pts), match/switch 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 12). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CouchDBLauncher.run (cognitive 30) · ×1
  • CouchDBLauncher.run (cognitive 30) core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/CouchDBLauncher.scala:72 — CouchDBLauncher.run has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 7 (28 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 21). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · utils.getApis (cognitive 29) · ×1
  • utils.getApis (cognitive 29) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:277 — utils.getApis has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (24 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 9). Most of this is not in the body itself: 6 of the 29 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 306). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation (cognitive 28) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1044 — FunctionPullingContainerProxy.initializeAndRunActivation has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (18 pts), match/switch 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · apigw-utils.getApis (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.getApis (cognitive 28) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:290 — apigw-utils.getApis has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (25 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). Most of this is not in the body itself: 6 of the 28 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 321). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · utils.getTenants (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • utils.getTenants (cognitive 25) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:90 — utils.getTenants has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (20 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 8). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 25 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 110). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · owperf.mainLoop (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • owperf.mainLoop (cognitive 25) tools/owperf/owperf.js:337 — owperf.mainLoop has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (20 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · main (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • main (cognitive 25) core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:48 — main has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), boolean chains 6, error handling 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 7). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 11 belong to 6 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · YARNContainerInfoActor.receive (cognitive 24) · ×1
  • YARNContainerInfoActor.receive (cognitive 24) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/yarn/YARNContainerInfoActor.scala:50 — YARNContainerInfoActor.receive has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (16 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 14). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ContainerManager.schedule (cognitive 24) · ×1
  • ContainerManager.schedule (cognitive 24) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:441 — ContainerManager.schedule has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (22 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PrimitiveActions.invokeConductor (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • PrimitiveActions.invokeConductor (cognitive 22) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/actions/PrimitiveActions.scala:329 — PrimitiveActions.invokeConductor has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 6 (17 pts), if/else 5 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CommonLoadBalancer.processCompletion (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • CommonLoadBalancer.processCompletion (cognitive 22) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/CommonLoadBalancer.scala:275 — CommonLoadBalancer.processCompletion has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (20 pts), match/switch 2 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · wskutil.request (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • wskutil.request (cognitive 22) tools/admin/wskutil.py:42 — wskutil.request has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (12 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts), error handling 3, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PackageCollection.checkPackageReadPermission (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • PackageCollection.checkPackageReadPermission (cognitive 21) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entitlement/PackageCollection.scala:84 — PackageCollection.checkPackageReadPermission has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (18 pts), match/switch 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CallbackModule.emit (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • CallbackModule.emit (cognitive 21) ansible/callbacks/logformatter.py:35 — CallbackModule.emit has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), ternaries 5 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WhiskWebActionsApi.handleMatch (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • WhiskWebActionsApi.handleMatch (cognitive 19) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/WebActions.scala:477 — WhiskWebActionsApi.handleMatch has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WhiskWebActionsApi.extractEntityAndProcessRequest (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • WhiskWebActionsApi.extractEntityAndProcessRequest (cognitive 19) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/WebActions.scala:579 — WhiskWebActionsApi.extractEntityAndProcessRequest has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (11 pts), match/switch 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · apigw-utils.addApiToGateway (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.addApiToGateway (cognitive 19) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:181 — apigw-utils.addApiToGateway has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (15 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 3). Most of this is not in the body itself: 3 of the 19 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 210). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · utils.createTenant (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • utils.createTenant (cognitive 19) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:37 — utils.createTenant has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (15 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 4). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 19 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 56). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WatcherService.watchBehavior (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • WatcherService.watchBehavior (cognitive 18) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/service/WatcherService.scala:126 — WatcherService.watchBehavior has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ActivationServiceImpl.fetchActivation (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • ActivationServiceImpl.fetchActivation (cognitive 18) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/grpc/ActivationServiceImpl.scala:64 — ActivationServiceImpl.fetchActivation has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WhiskConfig.readPropertiesFromFile (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • WhiskConfig.readPropertiesFromFile (cognitive 17) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/WhiskConfig.scala:126 — WhiskConfig.readPropertiesFromFile has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (14 pts), loops 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 · AttachmentSupport.attachToExternalStore (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • AttachmentSupport.attachToExternalStore (cognitive 17) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/AttachmentSupport.scala:139 — AttachmentSupport.attachToExternalStore has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 4 (10 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MongoDBArtifactStore.attachToMongo (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • MongoDBArtifactStore.attachToMongo (cognitive 17) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBArtifactStore.scala:375 — MongoDBArtifactStore.attachToMongo has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 4 (10 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WhiskWebActionsApi.completeRequest (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • WhiskWebActionsApi.completeRequest (cognitive 17) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/WebActions.scala:661 — WhiskWebActionsApi.completeRequest has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ShardingContainerPoolBalancer.publish (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • ShardingContainerPoolBalancer.publish (cognitive 17) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/loadBalancer/ShardingContainerPoolBalancer.scala:255 — ShardingContainerPoolBalancer.publish has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (15 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). 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 · DockerContainer.create (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • DockerContainer.create (cognitive 17) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/docker/DockerContainer.scala:61 — DockerContainer.create has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (7 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FunctionPullingContainerPool.adjustPrewarmedContainer (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • FunctionPullingContainerPool.adjustPrewarmedContainer (cognitive 17) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:448 — FunctionPullingContainerPool.adjustPrewarmedContainer has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · apigw-utils.deleteApiFromGateway (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.deleteApiFromGateway (cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:247 — apigw-utils.deleteApiFromGateway has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (13 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 3). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 17 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 263). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · apigw-utils.removeEndpointFromSwaggerApi (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • apigw-utils.removeEndpointFromSwaggerApi (cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:623 — apigw-utils.removeEndpointFromSwaggerApi has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · utils.addApiToGateway (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • utils.addApiToGateway (cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:165 — utils.addApiToGateway has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 3). Most of this is not in the body itself: 3 of the 17 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 200). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ActivationResponse.processRunResponseContent (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • ActivationResponse.processRunResponseContent (cognitive 16) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entity/ActivationResult.scala:199 — ActivationResponse.processRunResponseContent has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), match/switch 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 9). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StandaloneOpenWhisk.main (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • StandaloneOpenWhisk.main (cognitive 16) core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/StandaloneOpenWhisk.scala:212 — StandaloneOpenWhisk.main has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (14 pts), boolean chains 2 (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 · replicateDbs.replicateDatabases (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • replicateDbs.replicateDatabases (cognitive 16) tools/db/replicateDbs.py:40 — replicateDbs.replicateDatabases has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (7 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (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.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · owperf.processSample (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • owperf.processSample (cognitive 16) tools/owperf/owperf.js:540 — owperf.processSample has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (9 pts), ternaries 4, boolean chains 3 (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.
D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×1
  • Change coupling: Packages.scala ↔ PackageCollection.scala core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/Packages.scala — `core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/Packages.scala` and `core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/entitlement/PackageCollection.scala` 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 `15d8a85b` handle pekko deprecations (#5555); `cba3b7b3` Protect Package Bindings from containing circular references (#4122); `0296e9bc` Add package use tests when referencing a non-package or non-existant … (at that commit the files were still `core/controller/src/main/scala/whisk/core/controller/Packages.scala` and `core/controller/src/main/scala/whisk/core/entitlement/PackageCollection.scala`) — run `git show` on any of them.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (26–27 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (26–27 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:593 — core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:593-619 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:629-654 — 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 `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:593` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:621` calls `contains` and `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:655` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23–26 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (23–26 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala:167 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala:167-189 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/s3/S3AttachmentStore.scala:144-169 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/azblob/AzureBlobAttachmentStore.scala:167` 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 (24 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:904 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:904-927 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1194-1217 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:904` 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 (20 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:602 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:602-621 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerPool.scala:821-840 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerPool.scala:602` 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 (16–18 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16–18 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:74 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:74-89 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:99-116 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:74` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:73` calls `ElectionResult` and `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdWorker.scala:98` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdClient.scala:196 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdClient.scala:196-210 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdClient.scala:221-235 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/etcd/EtcdClient.scala:196` 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 (13 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1252 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1252-1264 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/InvokerReactive.scala:278-290 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala:1129-1141 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/QueueManager.scala:646-658 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 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 4 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1252` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala:1125` calls `Parameters`, `JsString` and `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1250` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:498 — core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:498-508 | core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:539-551 — 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 `core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/container/ContainerManager.scala:498` 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 (11 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:149 — core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:149-159 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:188-198 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:257-267 | core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:357-367 — all 4 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 `core/controller/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/controller/ApiUtils.scala:149` 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 (8–11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8–11 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:538 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:538-548 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBArtifactStore.scala:592-599 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/CouchDbRestStore.scala:538` 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 (10–11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBAsyncStreamSink.scala:88 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBAsyncStreamSink.scala:88-97 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBAsyncStreamSource.scala:78-88 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBAsyncStreamSink.scala:88` 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 (9–10 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/cosmosdb/CosmosDBArtifactStore.scala:320 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/cosmosdb/CosmosDBArtifactStore.scala:320-328 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/memory/MemoryArtifactStore.scala:211-220 — 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.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/AttachmentSupport.scala:153 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/AttachmentSupport.scala:153-161 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/mongodb/MongoDBArtifactStore.scala:382-389 — 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 `common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/AttachmentSupport.scala:153` 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 (7–9 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 2) core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:802 — core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:802-810 | core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala:1075-1081 — 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 `core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala:802` 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/common/ForcibleSemaphore.scala:63 — common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/common/ForcibleSemaphore.scala:63-71 | common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/common/ResizableSemaphore.scala:63-71 — 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.
D44 · Platform End-of-Life · End-of-life runtime · ×1
  • End-of-life runtime: .NET netcoreapp2.2 — tests/dat/actions/unicode.tests/src/dotnet2.2/Apache.OpenWhisk.UnicodeTests.Dotnet/Apache.OpenWhisk.UnicodeTests.Dotnet.csproj declares .NET netcoreapp2.2 as this project's target framework, and .NET Core 2.2, support ended 2019-12-23. An unsupported runtime receives no security patches, so every vulnerability disclosed in it since 2019-12-23 is present and unfixable without moving off it. This is a migration rather than an upgrade: there is no newer release of a runtime that has ended.
D8 · Code Coverage · Coverage not measured · ×1
  • Coverage not measured — no coverage collector is wired up — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
R1 · Type Safety · Type Safety · ×1
  • Type Safety — 0 typed · 8 plain JS — the untyped files are core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js, core/routemgmt/common/utils.js, core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js, core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js, core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js, tests/dat/actions/zippedaction/index.js (+2 more).
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (89 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (89 matched lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:53 — core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:53 · core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:58 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 736 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (76 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (76 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:346 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:346 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:334 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (33 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (33 matched lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:102 — core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:102 · core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:171 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 292 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:671 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:671 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:631 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:866 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:866 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:737 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 5 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 5 locations) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:56 — core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:56 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:110 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:200 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:250 · +1 more site(s) not listed — all 5 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:99 — core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:99 · core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:66 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:639 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:639 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:612 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:254 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:254 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:47 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 4 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 4 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:334 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:334 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:67 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:120 · core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:316 — the 4 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 3 locations) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:210 — core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:210 · core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:263 · core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:321 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function validateArgs (cyclomatic 27, cognitive 46) · ×1
  • Complex function validateArgs (cyclomatic 27, cognitive 46) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:246 — validateArgs has cyclomatic complexity 27 and cognitive complexity 46; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 21, cognitive 56) · ×1
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 21, cognitive 56) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:97 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 56; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function main (cyclomatic 16, cognitive 20) · ×1
  • Complex function main (cyclomatic 16, cognitive 20) core/routemgmt/createApi/createApi.js:58 — main has cyclomatic complexity 16 and cognitive complexity 20; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function processSample (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 16) · ×1
  • Complex function processSample (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 16) tools/owperf/owperf.js:540 — processSample has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function mainLoop (cyclomatic 14, cognitive 25) · ×1
  • Complex function mainLoop (cyclomatic 14, cognitive 25) tools/owperf/owperf.js:337 — mainLoop has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 25; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 22) · ×1
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 22) core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js:321 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 22; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function main (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) · ×1
  • Complex function main (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) core/routemgmt/getApi/getApi.js:48 — main has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 17) · ×1
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 17) core/routemgmt/common/utils.js:56 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function main (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 13) · ×1
  • Complex function main (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 13) core/routemgmt/deleteApi/deleteApi.js:46 — main has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R3 · Large Files · Large Files · ×1
  • Large Files — 3 file(s) over 400 lines (counted as significant lines — blank lines excluded — over production source only, tests excluded), largest first: core/routemgmt/common/apigw-utils.js (997), core/routemgmt/common/utils.js (734), tools/owperf/owperf.js (713).
R6 · Tooling · No lint script · ×1
  • No lint script — test ✓ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency 'btoa' · ×1
  • Unused dependency 'btoa' — Declared in tools/owperf/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency 'child-process-promise' · ×1
  • Unused dependency 'child-process-promise' — Declared in tools/owperf/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency 'cluster' · ×1
  • Unused dependency 'cluster' — Declared in tools/owperf/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · Third-party script without Subresource Integrity · ×1
  • Third-party script without Subresource Integrity core/standalone/src/main/resources/playground/ui/index.html:28 — `https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ace/1.4.2/ace.js` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. 3 such include(s) across the repository's markup.
SC1 · Supply-chain hygiene · NuGet dependencies are not locked · ×1
  • NuGet dependencies are not locked — No packages.lock.json and no central package management — restores aren't reproducible or pinned (SSDF PW.4.4). Enable <RestorePackagesWithLockFile>true</RestorePackagesWithLockFile> (commit the lockfile) or adopt Directory.Packages.props. Advisory — never scored.
Minor — 35 finding(s)
D31 · IaC & Container Security · REDACTED IaC · ×17
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Most significant orphaned file · ×3
  • Most significant orphaned file core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/v2/FunctionPullingContainerProxy.scala — 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 core/scheduler/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/scheduler/queue/MemoryQueue.scala — 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 core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala — 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.
D19 · Documentation Quality · Documentation · ×2
  • Documentation: no installation or build instructions README.md — There are no installation/build or setup instructions for a non-ansible tool like Gradle. Add an Install section covering how to set up Gradle and run the initial build, plus any prerequisites.
  • Documentation: no usage examples README.md — Usage examples are sparse: only one test-run command is shown with no explanation of what it does. Expand usage into a 'How to run it' section covering all main commands (build, deploy, invoke) and their parameters.
D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1
  • Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 2 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: core/standalone/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/standalone/LogbackConfigurator.scala, common/scala/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/database/s3/CloudFrontSigner.scala. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
D16 · Bus Factor · Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1
  • Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 1 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (3 single-owned of 193 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; 193 of the 295 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above.
D28 · Secrets (history) · Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
  • REDACTED
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Concentrated knowledge decay · ×1
  • Concentrated knowledge decay — 184 of 228 significant files have no living knowledge, while the repository is still being changed at a low rate (7 commit(s) in the last 90 days) — so this is one repo-wide knowledge-decay state, not 184 separate risks. Counted over 228 of the 295 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.
DM2 · Strongly-typed ids · Primitive id on a domain type · ×1
  • Primitive id on a domain type: WatchEndpointOperation.watchKey — `WatchEndpointOperation.watchKey` is a raw `String` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `String`, in whatever form your language spells that.
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.
M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×1
  • README/code drift — README claims standalone OpenWhisk is a full-featured stack but the evidence shows only the standalone/standalone/README.md project exists — searched for: `Standalone Stack`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, REDACTED); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1
  • No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add scalafix or scapegoat (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 30352 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.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No rollback/health safety · ×1
  • No rollback/health safety — Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×1
  • No security response headers detected common/scala/src/main/resources/application.conf:40 — No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. This is reported because `application.conf` is committed to this repository and declares the server that serves it, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-78d03b7d578c463eb108b7cfdde2e2cf/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .2artifacts/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-78d03b7d578c463eb108b7cfdde2e2cf/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .1artifacts/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 .59artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy config --format json --quiet .108artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.0—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0—
D40 · Network Egress Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D43 · Malicious Dependenciestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a0ca89-cbd5-7d74-b9ca-3f0c84e6ac38 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Issues: 81 · Warnings: 246 · Recommendations: 35 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 22-09-2026 @ 19:13 UTC.

Downloadable artifacts

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

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