apibuilder — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

Preview (pre-1.0). This repo hasn't declared a stable release, so it's judged against a relaxed, pre-production bar.

This system holds a weak overall standing with a health score of 39%, indicating a workable asset carrying significant operational risk. While the code itself is clean and maintainable, the foundation is fragile. The business value tied up here is moderate, requiring roughly 0.3 person-years to rebuild at an estimated cost of €48,000. This is not a massive monolith, but it is large enough that instability will directly impact delivery speed and reliability. The primary concern is not the logic, but the ability to operate it safely and predictably.

The most critical theme is operational fragility. With a readiness score of only 34%, the system lacks the testing, observability, and security controls needed for safe deployment. This creates a high risk of outages and defects slipping into production, which will increase support costs and erode user trust. The second theme is security exposure. Two leaked secrets were detected, likely in configuration files. This is a direct vulnerability that could lead to data breaches or unauthorized access. While the code structure is sound, these gaps in maturity and readiness mean the team cannot confidently ship changes without risking stability.

On the positive side, the code health is excellent at 90%, and the architecture is reasonably solid at 49%. The system is not a mess of technical debt; it is well-structured but poorly guarded. This means improvements can be made without a costly rewrite. The good news is that the core logic is reliable and easy to understand, which reduces the long-term maintenance burden.

Focus first on resolving the leaked secrets. This is the highest-leverage action, taking minimal effort but immediately reducing critical security risk. Once secured, prioritize improving operational readiness by adding automated security checks to the CI pipeline and maintaining a clear changelog. This will stabilize releases and reduce the cost of future changes. Note that domain modeling and event-driven aspects were not measured, so this assessment is partial. However, the immediate risks are clear and actionable.

Code Health 90% ★ Exemplary Architecture 49% Adequate · gated by D26 Maturity 47% Adequate · gated by M1, M2 Readiness 34% Weak · gated by D13, P3 Security 39% Weak · gated by D28, D29, D36 Accessibility 40% Weak · gated by AC4, AC6

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.

Readiness 34% · 46% weightSecurity 39% · 25% weightAccessibility 40% · 14% weightMaturity 47% · 8% weightArchitecture 49% · 4% weightCode Health 90% · 2% weight

Raise Readiness 34 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 39 → ~44.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €16,000–€79,000

Cost to rebuild	€16,000–€79,000 (0.2–0.5 person-years (263–835 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	0.7× (at 39% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape	Medium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~0.3 person-years of build effort (about ~€48,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 34% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.0) — standard service × 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.

Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (2).

+5.7 pts · Low effort · REDACTED Scanning

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.

+5.7 pts · Medium effort · Security & performance tooling

Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.

+5.2 pts · Medium effort · Release Hygiene

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Value concentrated against a weak lens · High · Value at risk

This is a Medium asset (~0.3 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Readiness at 34%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.

Evidence: valuation: Medium, ~0.3 person-years rebuild (41,807 LoC) · weakest lens: Readiness 34%

→ Direct remediation budget at Readiness first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage

Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (2). The rest can wait behind it.

Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort

→ Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (2).

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.)

185 modules, 535 dependencies. 1 dependency cycle across 33 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 145 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 io.apibuilder.api.v0.models.AppSortBy	2 io.apibuilder.avro.ApiBuilder	3 io.apibuilder.common.v0.models	4 lib.Emails.Context	5 lib.query	6 util.BasicAuthorization	7 db.Authorization	8 io.apibuilder.api.json.v0.models	9 io.apibuilder.task.v0.models	10 io.apibuilder.api.json.v0.models.ParameterLocation	11 io.apibuilder.api.v0	12 io.apibuilder.spec.v0.models	13 db.generators	14 models	15 lib	16 lib.Primitives	17 db.generated	18 db	19 controllers	20 io.apibuilder.api.v0.models	21 io.apibuilder.generator.v0.models	22 io.apibuilder.avro	23 io.apibuilder.avro.SchemaType	25 core	29 io.apibuilder.generator.v0.Client	31 io.apibuilder.swagger.translators	32 builder.api_json	34 builder.api_json.InternalDatatype	39 util
1 io.apibuilder.api.v0.models.AppSortBy																				5			1
2 io.apibuilder.avro.ApiBuilder																							6
3 io.apibuilder.common.v0.models																							2
4 lib.Emails.Context																		1
5 lib.query																							2
6 util.BasicAuthorization																		3					3
7 db.Authorization					3													3					3
8 io.apibuilder.api.json.v0.models		5																					36
9 io.apibuilder.task.v0.models			1																				1
10 io.apibuilder.api.json.v0.models.ParameterLocation								5															1
11 io.apibuilder.api.v0			3	1		1	1	1							1	13			27	38	1		36
12 io.apibuilder.spec.v0.models		6		3				63												3			35
13 db.generators												1				2		2		3	1		9
14 models				2		1	2	3				2	2					15		16			5
15 lib		2	1	1			2	13		1	3	3		2		6		2		12	4		58	1				1
16 lib.Primitives															12
17 db.generated				2	44	4	2	2								22				38			104
18 db	3		4	1	2	1	2	1	1			1			1	17	7			44			75
19 controllers			4				3				4	1		3	2	3		16		15			55
20 io.apibuilder.api.v0.models	6		19	2		3	7	2				1			1				3		3		50
21 io.apibuilder.generator.v0.models			1					2				1								1			7
22 io.apibuilder.avro		4										3			4	2					1		6
23 io.apibuilder.avro.SchemaType																						14
24 builder.api_json.templates		2						25								2							19
25 core												2			2	2							15
26 db.generated.generators					4							2				2				2	2		8
27 io.apibuilder.api.json.v0.Bindables								1															6
28 io.apibuilder.api.v0.Client			3	1		1	1	1							1	13			24	38	1		35
29 io.apibuilder.generator.v0.Client			1																2		3		3
30 io.apibuilder.spec.v0.mock		2		1				17				5								1			4
31 io.apibuilder.swagger.translators		1						8		1		2				1							11
32 builder.api_json												3			8	19							38	16				2
33 io.apibuilder.generator.v0.mock			2					1											4	1	8		6		1
34 builder.api_json.InternalDatatype																							6				3
35 builder.api_json.ServiceBuilder		1						15															5	5			20
36 builder		2						5				3			4	3				1			8	2				1
37 db.generated.ApplicationMovesTable																							1					1
38 io.apibuilder.swagger								9		2		2			3	3					2		13			1		2
39 util					2	1		2			1	2	1		3	1		4		2	1		14					2
40 processor			1		1				6		1		1		2	16	6			3	1		21					1	3

Dependency, pointing down the layeringAbove the diagonal — part of a cycleThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 90% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D1 · Scala Cyclomatic Complexity 8.3 D2 · Scala Cognitive Complexity 7.5 D4 · Scala Code Duplication 9.3 D17 · Scala Explicit Debt 9.9

At a glance — Architecture · 49% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

The Good

D6 · Scala Cohesion (LCOM4) 8.2 D35 · Scala Change Coupling 10.0

The Ugly

D26 · Scala Project Cohesion 0.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 4.0

At a glance — Maturity · 47% · Adequate · gated by M1, M2 ·

The Good

D15 · Scala Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · Scala Documentation Quality 8.3 D21 · Scala Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Scala Knowledge Freshness 9.8 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Ugly

D20 · Scala ADR Quality 0.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 2.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0

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

The Good

D12 · Scala Dependency Hygiene 8.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 6.5 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 8.0

The Bad

P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 5.0

The Ugly

D13 · Scala REDACTED Scanning 0.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 0.0

At a glance — Security · 39% · Weak · gated by D28, D29, D36 ·

The Good

D31 · Scala IaC & Container Security 8.9

The Ugly

D28 · Scala Secrets (history) 2.0 D29 · Scala Static Analysis (SAST) 2.3 D36 · Scala Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5

At a glance — Accessibility · 40% · Weak · gated by AC4, AC6 ·

The Good

AC1 · Repo Text alternatives 10.0 AC5 · Repo ARIA correctness 10.0

The Bad

AC2 · Repo Forms & labels 5.7 AC3 · Repo Page structure 4.6

The Ugly

AC4 · Repo Keyboard semantics 1.0 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 3.5 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 category	Findings	Severity
A03:2021 — Injection	15	High / Critical
A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures	11	High / Critical
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration	8	High / Critical

Roadmap

Immediately resolve the two leaked secrets in REDACTED to secure the codebase, then integrate a SAST step into CI to prevent security regressions from merging. Maintain a changelog to track release changes and extend structured logging across all runnable modules for better production observability. Finally, enforce an approval gate before production promotion to ensure proper oversight during deployment.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (2).	+5.7 pts	Low	REDACTED Scanning
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.	+5.7 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.	+5.2 pts	Medium	Release Hygiene
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.	+4.6 pts	Medium	Observability
Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.	+4.0 pts	Medium	Deployment & Rollback
Resolve the 8 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED, REDACTED.	+1.7 pts	Low	Secrets (history)
Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.	+3.2 pts	Medium	Keyboard semantics
Keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1.	+3.2 pts	Medium	Visual & motion safety

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 73 files carrying findings, judged against the Preview bar: 1% slop · 17% mixed · 82% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	2.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.4	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.4	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.7	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
api/app/controllers/Versions.scala	5.7	Mixed	Cognitive Complexity: Versions.postByVersion (cognitive 17)
swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/translators/Field.scala	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
app/app/controllers/Versions.scala	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/Parser.scala	6.7	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
api/app/db/InternalMembershipRequestsDao.scala	6.7	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala	7.0	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (22 members, 50+ identical tokens)
api/app/controllers/Applications.scala	7.0	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (8 lines × 2)
generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala	7.0	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (7 lines × 2)
generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala	7.1	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (12 lines × 3)
api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala	7.2	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (17 lines × 2)
generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala	7.2	Near-clean	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (12 lines × 3)
REDACTED	7.2	Near-clean	Secrets (history): 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 — 25

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 — 154

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 — 31

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

Could not be resolved — 54

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. 32 of 35 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 — 35 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D4D6D12D13D15D17D19D20D21D26D28D29D31D34D35D36AC1AC2AC3AC4AC5AC6AC7AX10M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P6

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 181 of 210 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0e9ae-800d-7f7d-a586-c77f89c4a623.

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.

D5 Coupling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.scala) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (`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. You can widen what we reach: optional: 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 — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.scala) and this repository declares an sbt build (repository root, 127 test files), but it was not re-run: the analyzer environment could not run it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository's package manifest is not parsed for licence data yet. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository's licenses are compliant (an sbt build (build.sbt)), which this pass does not parse yet — so this dimension asserts nothing about this repository's licensing in either direction.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (50 contributor(s) across 3935 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 86% of the history; the other 49 hold 0.3% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (project/plugins.sbt), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — 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 dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (go.mod, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a REDACTED) is simply not read here yet.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 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.
AX2 Stateful singletons — 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.
AX3 Project dependency cycles — 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 which project references which. That is a language-neutral question, but the project-reference graph is collected from MSBuild .csproj, Gradle, Maven, Cargo, npm/pnpm/yarn, Go module, Python pyproject.toml and SwiftPM builds only, and this repository commits none — so there was no graph to read, and re-running the same commit reads the same nothing. Its modules are declared as: sbt subprojects (build.sbt). A reader for that graph is the collector this check is missing. That is a COLLECTOR gap in this analyzer — no change to the scan image closes it — and not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX4 Dependency direction — 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 direction each project reference points. That is a language-neutral question, but the project-reference graph is collected from MSBuild .csproj, Gradle, Maven, Cargo, npm/pnpm/yarn, Go module, Python pyproject.toml and SwiftPM builds only, and this repository commits none — so there was no graph to read, and re-running the same commit reads the same nothing. Its modules are declared as: sbt subprojects (build.sbt). A reader for that graph is the collector this check is missing. That is a COLLECTOR gap in this analyzer — no change to the scan image closes it — and not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
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.
AX8 Test isolation — 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 which projects are test projects, and what they reference. That is a language-neutral question, but the project-reference graph is collected from MSBuild .csproj, Gradle, Maven, Cargo, npm/pnpm/yarn, Go module, Python pyproject.toml and SwiftPM builds only, and this repository commits none — so there was no graph to read, and re-running the same commit reads the same nothing. Its modules are declared as: sbt subprojects (build.sbt). A reader for that graph is the collector this check is missing. That is a COLLECTOR gap in this analyzer — no change to the scan image closes it — and 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.
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.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check 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.
P10 Library API & versioning — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads NuGet packaging and C# public API only, and no .NET project was loaded for this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
PF1 Benchmark discipline — 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.
PF2 Allocation 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. 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.
PF3 Async & latency 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. Those languages colour their functions async, so blocking inside them is the same defect this card counts elsewhere, but their blocking vocabulary is not modelled yet. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the code is free of it.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
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.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 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.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 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.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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.
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.
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.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
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.
AC4 Keyboard semantics: Keyboard semantics are inferred from markup attributes — interactivity wired purely in script, focus managed at runtime, and component-level handlers are invisible. A clean result means "no static keyboard-trap shape", not a keyboard-operability proof.
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.
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 Complexity8.3 / 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 8.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TypeValidator.validate at 57.

TypeValidator.validate (cyclomatic 57)core/app/TypeValidator.scala:174

JsonUtil.validate (cyclomatic 43)core/app/builder/JsonUtil.scala:14

Field.specialize (cyclomatic 18)swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/translators/Field.scala:46

InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cyclomatic 16)api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala:39

What to do

Resolve the 1 TypeValidator.validate (cyclomatic 57) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with TypeValidator.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 JsonUtil.validate (cyclomatic 43) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with JsonUtil.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Field.specialize (cyclomatic 18) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with Field.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

9 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TypeValidator.validate at 80.

TypeValidator.validate (cognitive 80)core/app/TypeValidator.scala:174

Versions.show (cognitive 47)app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:31

InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cognitive 25)api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala:39

JsonUtil.validate (cognitive 20)core/app/builder/JsonUtil.scala:14

Versions.postByVersion (cognitive 17)api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:102

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

What to do

Resolve the 1 TypeValidator.validate (cognitive 80) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with TypeValidator.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Versions.show (cognitive 47) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with Versions.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cognitive 25) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with InternalOrganizationsDao.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.3 / 10Stronggated by 62 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 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

58 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 4 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×9api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:174

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×4core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:831

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×3api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:42

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×3api/app/controllers/Applications.scala:50

Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) · ×3api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:175

+ 29 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 9 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with OriginalsDao.scala (5), ServiceDiff.scala, Code.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with InternalApiJsonForm.scala, OriginalsDao.scala, VersionsDao.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala, Members.scala, Versions.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)8.2 / 10Strong✓ 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 8.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

8 of 54 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: Organizations (LCOM4 8) · ×8api/app/controllers/Organizations.scala:16

What to do

Resolve the 8 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with Organizations.scala (2), Applications.scala, MembershipRequests.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D12 · Dependency Hygiene~~9.3~~ 8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.

Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 86% · ceiling Verified

14 outdated direct sbt declarations. 18 of 21 direct declarations were graded against Maven Central (3 not published there, which is what a private Nexus or Artifactory artifact looks like, 0 declaring a version range rather than an exact version). An sbt declaration names an EXACT version, so the remedy is an edit to the build file — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it. Test-, Provided- and it-scoped declarations are excluded, because a consumer of this project never receives them. A version held in a Scala val is not read: sbt is a program rather than a manifest, and evaluating one would invent the measurement rather than take it. Whether any artifact is DEPRECATED or ABANDONED is not graded and cannot be — Maven Central publishes no such marker, and release age does not stand in for one: the most widely depended-upon libraries are routinely the stalest, being finished rather than abandoned. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question.

Outdated: com.datadoghq:dd-java-agent · ×14

What to do

Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

2 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt9.9 / 10Stronggated by 31 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

31 deducted task-comment markers across 41807 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.9. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×31api/app/controllers/GeneratorServices.scala:61

What to do

Resolve the 31 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with GeneratorServices.scala (2), InternalOrganizationsDao.scala (2), InternalMembershipsDao.scala (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (31 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README (README.md) states 'API Builder' and links to online docs but does not describe what the project is or what it does; its only visible content is a build-status badge and an overview line ('Simple, Comprehensive Tooling for Modern APIs'). The app/public/icons README is a directory doc. A per-project architecture/Docs markdown set of 21 files gives strong architectural documentation (e.g., generators, code generation principles). The READMEs are excellent documentation for an API Builder project: they open with a clear overview (getting started, templates, type info, why choose API Builder), describe the workflow and examples in detail, and explain features like reusable templates and primitive typing. The architecture/Docs markdown files (start.scala.html, templates.scala.html, types.scala.html, why.scala.html) are well-structured and cover the project's purpose, usage, and design rationale, but they are not referenced in the READMEs and do not appear to be part of the repository root documentation set.

Documentation: no project overview · ×3app/app/views/doc/start.scala.html

What to do

Resolve the 3 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with start.scala.html (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 1 build units (sbt) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

8 finding(s): 0 critical, 8 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 8 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 issue-level).
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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)2.3 / 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 2.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

15 finding(s): 0 critical, 10 high, 5 medium, 0 low. 3 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 69 file(s) — `api/app/views/emails/applicationCreated.scala.html` (lines 1–5, line 11, line 15), `api/app/views/emails/emailVerificationCreated.scala.html` (lines 1–4), `api/app/views/emails/membershipCreated.scala.html` (lines 1–4), `api/app/views/emails/membershipRequestCreated.scala.html` (lines 1–4), `api/app/views/emails/passwordResetRequestCreated.scala.html` (lines 1–4), … (+64 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 1 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

What to do

Resolve the 4 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 3 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security8.9 / 10Adequategated by 2 critical findings✓ 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 8.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

8 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 4 medium, 2 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 4 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Low IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.

Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.

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

1 of 91 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/SwaggerData.scala. Counted over 91 of the 249 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing2.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

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

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC2 · Forms & labels5.7 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one. (×13) — app/app/views/account/profile/edit.scala.html:15, app/app/views/application_settings/form.scala.html:11, app/app/views/application_settings/move_form.scala.html:11, …
This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label. — app/app/views/mainNavbar.scala.html:18
A button with no text and no aria-label has no accessible name. Add visible text or an aria-label (an icon-only button still needs one). — app/app/views/mainNavbar.scala.html:23

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC3 · Page structure4.6 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope). (×11) — app/app/views/attributes/index.scala.html:14, app/app/views/code/index.scala.html:18, app/app/views/history/index.scala.html:37, …
A page with no <title> gives no name in the tab, history or screen-reader page list. Add a descriptive <title> in <head>. — app/app/views/main.scala.html:7
No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — app/app/views/main.scala.html:7

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC4 · Keyboard semantics1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether interactive behaviour is keyboard-reachable — no click handler on a non-interactive element lacking a role, tabindex and key handler, no element the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer` without giving it any of the three, no unfocusable element whose only binding is a mouse enter/leave pair or a double-click, no positive tabindex, no href-less anchor, no placeholder-href (#/javascript) link acting as a button. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: click handlers on non-interactive elements lacking role+tabindex+key handler, positive tabindex values, and href-less anchors. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: interactive elements plus elements the markup gives a click/key handler or the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer`, in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx). Keyboard reachability is judged from the markup, never from a rendered page. ★ An interactive element declared in a tagged-template (html`…`) or hyperscript frontend is NOT in this population — no producer reads either — so an empty population is reported as an analyzer gap, never as "this repository has no interactive elements".

An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action. (×2) — app/app/views/versions/resources.scala.html:29, app/app/views/versions/resources.scala.html:30

What to do

Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC6 · Visual & motion safety3.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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.

`.nav-sidebar > .active > a` sets color: #fff on background-color: #428bca — 3.6:1, below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Darken or lighten one of them. — app/public/stylesheets/main.css:73

What to do

Keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No accessibility enforcement found — no automated accessibility check runs over the HTML your app renders. Assert the accessibility invariants over that HTML in the test suite you already have (parse the output and assert, or drive a browser), and gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 61 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

Enforce accessibility in the test suite you already have: assert the accessibility invariants over the HTML your app renders — parse the rendered output in an existing test, or drive a real browser from one — and gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX10 · Code composition4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)2.0 / 10Weak✓ 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.

The root README is 13 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.

What to do

Expand the README with getting-started, architecture overview and a project map.
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 6 of 6 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

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).
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability6.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: structured-logging frameworks (Serilog, NLog), OpenTelemetry, and health-check endpoint patterns. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Only 1/2 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`.

What to do

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
Add OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-java or Micrometer) so requests are traceable across the system, not just health-probable.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add 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 2791 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.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.

Do you agree with this assessment?

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 15 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (27%; ≈30% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 40 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).

Dimension	WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria	Coverage
AC1 · Text alternatives	1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5	Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels	1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure	1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC4 · Keyboard semantics	2.1.1, 2.4.3	Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness	4.1.2	Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety	1.4.3, 2.4.7	Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcement	enforcement — no page criterion	Enforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 40 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, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 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.

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	90%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Architecture	49%	Adequate — gated by D26	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity	47%	Adequate — gated by M1, M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	34%	Weak — gated by D13, P3	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	39%	Weak — gated by D28, D29, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility	40%	Weak — gated by AC4, AC6	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.

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.

AX1 Captive dependencies — 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
AX2 Stateful singletons — 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
AX3 Project dependency cycles — not assessed — project cycles and dependency direction are computed over a project-reference graph that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository commits no project file of a kind this check models. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX4 Dependency direction — not assessed — project cycles and dependency direction are computed over a project-reference graph that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository commits no project file of a kind this check models. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
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 — not assessed — test isolation is computed from a project graph (which projects are test projects, and what they reference) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository commits no project file of a kind this check models. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~14028 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 included — the .scala suite was found but not re-run
D14 License Compliance — Package manifest not parsed for licence data — analyzer language-coverage gap
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. 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
D3 God Classes — Most of this repository's production source (.scala) was not read by god-class detection, so class size was not assessed for the languages that are the product — whatever else this pass did read is not this repository's class size. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (an sbt build (build.sbt) — not scanned yet).
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (an sbt build (build.sbt) — not scanned yet).
D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
D5 Coupling — D5 reads a .NET project-reference graph only — this repository's production source is .rb, .scala, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.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 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (3 signals for this style, 2 needed — the count is met but a required primary signal is absent): 532 value object(s); 2 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one; a Domain/Aggregates/ValueObjects layer; a domain structure with no aggregate, domain event or strongly-typed id in it: a CRUD / clean-architecture model, measured but not claimed as DDD; a top-level examples/ tree: a library or framework whose examples are its consumers — these types are building blocks, not a domain
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 — 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
P10 Library API & versioning — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JVM, JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (`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 — 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
PF2 Allocation hygiene — 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
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Sync-over-async was not assessed: this repository's async code is written in Scala, whose blocking calls this check does not model yet. That is a gap in the analyzer's language reach, not a finding about your code.
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
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
X10 Duplicated predicate — 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
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 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
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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 — 25 finding(s)

D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×8

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D13 · REDACTED Scanning · Leaked secret · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

AC2 · Forms & labels · <input> without a programmatic label · ×1

<input> without a programmatic label app/app/views/mainNavbar.scala.html:18 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.

AC2 · Forms & labels · <button> with no accessible text · ×1

<button> with no accessible text app/app/views/mainNavbar.scala.html:23 — A button with no text and no aria-label has no accessible name. Add visible text or an aria-label (an icon-only button still needs one).

AC3 · Page structure · Document without a <title> · ×1

Document without a <title> app/app/views/main.scala.html:7 — A page with no <title> gives no name in the tab, history or screen-reader page list. Add a descriptive <title> in <head>.

Serious — 154 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×31

TodoComment api/app/controllers/GeneratorServices.scala:61 — // TODO: Refactor so we can validate w/out creating first. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/controllers/GeneratorServices.scala:86 — // TODO: Generalize permission check — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/controllers/Code.scala:156 — // TODO: Should we merge the org attributes into the provided invocation form? I think that — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/ItemsDao.scala:148 — // TODO: Decide if we want to support this use case of — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalUsersDao.scala:124 — // TODO: Move to inside a transaction — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalTasksDao.scala:20 — // TODO: Use a bulk insert for this method — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala:34 — // TODO: resolve circular dependency — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala:154 — // TODO: Figure out how we want to handle domains. Best option — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalMembershipsDao.scala:74 — // TODO: Wrap in transaction — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalMembershipsDao.scala:167 — // TODO Implement authorization — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/InternalMembershipRequestsDao.scala:133 — // TODO Implement authorization — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/db/generators/InternalGeneratorsDao.scala:141 — // TODO: structure this filter — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/app/lib/Emails.scala:52 — // TODO: Should we use filter? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/test/controllers/GeneratorServicesSpec.scala:21 — // TODO: Switch to REST API. But first need to resolve dependency — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment api/test/db/InternalEmailVerificationsDaoSpec.scala:21 — // TODO: Change to eventually — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:61 — // TODO: For updates, include application in the template — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment app/app/controllers/OrganizationAttributesController.scala:23 — // TODO: Paginate once we exceed limit — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment app/app/models/MainTemplate.scala:16 — // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment lib/src/test/scala/TextSpec.scala:225 — // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/Parser.scala:30 — // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/translators/Resolver.scala:50 — // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment app/app/models/MainTemplate.scala:66 — // TODO: Remove this class and use Option[SettingSection] directly — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment core/app/builder/ServiceSpecValidator.scala:188 — // TODO: Future work to validate the fields from the imported interface — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment core/app/builder/api_json/ApiJsonServiceValidator.scala:120 — // TODO. need to cache somewhere to avoid a second lookup when parsing later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment core/app/builder/api_json/upgrades/InterfacesToSupportResources.scala:7 — // TODO: placeholder for future work — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
+ 6 more in this group — see findings.md.

AC2 · Forms & labels · <fieldset> without a <legend> · ×13

<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/account/profile/edit.scala.html:15 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/application_settings/form.scala.html:11 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/application_settings/move_form.scala.html:11 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/attributes/attributeForm.scala.html:5 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/domains/form.scala.html:11 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/generators/generatorForm.scala.html:5 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/login/forgotPassword.scala.html:9 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/login/legacy.scala.html:42 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/login/resetPassword.scala.html:15 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/members/add.scala.html:16 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/organization_attributes/edit.scala.html:15 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/organizations/orgForm.scala.html:9 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.
<fieldset> without a <legend> app/app/views/tokens/create.scala.html:14 — A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child — or, if the group already has a visible caption beside it (or the fieldset is there only to disable its subtree and carries no group box), point aria-labelledby at that caption's id instead, which names the group without rendering a second one.

AC3 · Page structure · Data table has no header cells · ×11

Data table has no header cells app/app/views/attributes/index.scala.html:14 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/code/index.scala.html:18 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/history/index.scala.html:37 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/index.scala.html:32 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/index.scala.html:56 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/index.scala.html:84 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/organization_attributes/index.scala.html:9 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/organizations/membershipRequests.scala.html:10 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/search/index.scala.html:14 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/subscriptions/index.scala.html:10 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
Data table has no header cells app/app/views/versions/imports.scala.html:3 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×9

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:174 — api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:174-179 | api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:272-277 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) app/app/controllers/Code.scala:32 — app/app/controllers/Code.scala:32-37 | app/app/controllers/Code.scala:83-88 — 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 `app/app/controllers/Code.scala:32` 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 (6 lines × 2) core/app/builder/api_json/ServiceBuilder.scala:134 — core/app/builder/api_json/ServiceBuilder.scala:134-139 | core/app/builder/api_json/ServiceBuilder.scala:176-181 — 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/app/builder/api_json/ServiceBuilder.scala:134` 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 (6 lines × 2) generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:542 — generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:542-547 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:542-547 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 14 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:542` 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 (6 lines × 2) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:273 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:273-278 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:273-278 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:273` 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 (6 lines × 2) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:403 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:403-408 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:404-409 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:403` 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 (6 lines × 2) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:423 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:423-428 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:424-429 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:423` 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 (6 lines × 2) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:443 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:443-448 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:453-458 — 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:443` 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 (6 lines × 2) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:463 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:463-468 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:473-478 — 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:463` 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×8

Low cohesion: Organizations (LCOM4 8) api/app/controllers/Organizations.scala:16 — Organizations's methods fall into 8 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 8 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.
Low cohesion: Applications (LCOM4 7) api/app/controllers/Applications.scala:16 — Applications's methods fall into 7 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 7 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.
Low cohesion: MembershipRequests (LCOM4 4) api/app/controllers/MembershipRequests.scala:15 — MembershipRequests'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.
Low cohesion: Tokens (LCOM4 4) api/app/controllers/Tokens.scala:15 — Tokens'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.
Low cohesion: Users (LCOM4 4) api/app/controllers/Users.scala:20 — Users'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.
Low cohesion: Versions (LCOM4 4) api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:17 — Versions'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.
Low cohesion: LoginController (LCOM4 4) app/app/controllers/LoginController.scala:14 — LoginController'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.
Low cohesion: Organizations (LCOM4 4) app/app/controllers/Organizations.scala:16 — Organizations'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.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:831 — core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:831-837 | core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:908-914 — 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, `core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:907` calls `asOptString` and `core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:830` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:295 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:295-301 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:295-301 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:295` 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) generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:144 — generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:144-150 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:170-176 — 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 (7 lines × 2) generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:148 — generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:148-154 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:122-128 — `generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 53 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:148` 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, `generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:155` calls `equals`, `optionalIn` and `generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:129` 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.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:42 — api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:42-54 | api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala:34-46 — before extracting anything, compare `api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala` and `api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:42` 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 (13 lines × 2) app/app/controllers/Members.scala:120 — app/app/controllers/Members.scala:120-132 | app/app/controllers/Members.scala:146-158 — 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 `app/app/controllers/Members.scala:120` 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 (13 lines × 2) app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:79 — app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:79-91 | app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:136-148 — 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 `app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:79` 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 (8 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) api/app/controllers/Applications.scala:50 — api/app/controllers/Applications.scala:50-57 | api/app/controllers/Applications.scala:72-79 — 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 `api/app/controllers/Applications.scala:50` 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) api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:519 — api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:519-526 | api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:546-553 — 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 `api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:519` 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) generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:553 — generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:553-560 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:553-560 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 14 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:553` 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 (5 lines × 3) · ×3

Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:175 — api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:175-179 | api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:273-277 | api/app/lib/ServiceDiff.scala:347-351 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:124 — generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:124-128 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:116-120 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:110-114 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:124` 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 (5 lines × 3) generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:110 — generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:110-114 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:110-114 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:116-120 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 14 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:110` 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 (5 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) app/app/controllers/Members.scala:108 — app/app/controllers/Members.scala:108-112 | app/app/controllers/Members.scala:135-139 — 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 `app/app/controllers/Members.scala:108` 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/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:515 — core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:515-519 | core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:537-541 — 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 after the matched lines, `core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:543` calls `fromJson`, `getOrElse` and `core/app/builder/api_json/InternalApiJsonForm.scala:521` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) avro/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/avro/Parser.scala:122 — avro/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/avro/Parser.scala:122-126 | swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/Util.scala:25-29 — 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 (6 lines × 3) · ×3

Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:491 — generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:491-496 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:480-485 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:471-476 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:491` 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 (6 lines × 3) generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:511 — generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:511-516 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:500-505 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:491-496 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:511` 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 (6 lines × 3) generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:362 — generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:362-367 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:363-368 | generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:503-508 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:362` 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.

AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Anchor without href · ×2

Anchor without href app/app/views/versions/resources.scala.html:29 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.
Anchor without href app/app/views/versions/resources.scala.html:30 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:142 — generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:142-153 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:134-145 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:128-139 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. 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 × 3) generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:128 — generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:128-139 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:128-139 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:134-145 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 14 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. 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 (10 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:86 — api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:86-95 | api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala:80-89 — before extracting anything, compare `api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala` and `api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (10 lines × 2) app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:301 — app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:301-310 | app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:316-325 — 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 `app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:301` 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 (9 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:138 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:138-146 | generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:168-176 — 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 (9 lines × 2) api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:66 — api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:66-74 | api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala:60-68 — before extracting anything, compare `api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala` and `api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:66` 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 (6 lines × 20) · ×2

Duplicated block (6 lines × 20) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:467 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:467-472 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:445-450 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:385-390 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:495-500 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:389-394 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:451-456 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:431-436 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:431-436 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:450-455 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:420-425 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:407-412 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:440-445 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:440-445 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:431-436 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:423-428 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:453-458 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:429-434 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:413-418 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:419-424 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:362-367 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:467` 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 (6 lines × 20) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:487 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:487-492 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:465-470 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:405-410 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:515-520 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:409-414 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:471-476 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:451-456 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:451-456 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:470-475 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:440-445 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:427-432 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:460-465 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:460-465 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:451-456 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:443-448 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:473-478 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:449-454 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:433-438 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:439-444 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:382-387 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:487` 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 (6 lines × 4) · ×2

Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:507 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:507-512 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:535-540 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:493-498 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:509-514 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 58 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:507` 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 (6 lines × 4) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:527 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:527-532 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:555-560 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:513-518 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:529-534 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 58 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:527` 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 (6 lines × 6) · ×2

Duplicated block (6 lines × 6) generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:485 — generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:485-490 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:471-476 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:471-476 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:530-535 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:460-465 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:480-485 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 58 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:485` 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 (6 lines × 6) generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:505 — generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:505-510 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:491-496 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:491-496 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:550-555 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:480-485 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:500-505 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 58 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:505` 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 (6 lines × 9) · ×2

Duplicated block (6 lines × 9) generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:531 — generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:531-536 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:511-516 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:511-516 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:520-525 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:444-449 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:520-525 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:511-516 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:463-468 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:469-474 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 58 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:531` 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 (6 lines × 9) generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:551 — generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:551-556 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:531-536 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:531-536 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:540-545 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:464-469 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:540-545 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:531-536 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:483-488 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:489-494 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 58 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.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.

AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×1

Page without a main landmark app/app/views/main.scala.html:7 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>.

AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Low contrast colour pair in CSS (3.6 · ×1

Low contrast colour pair in CSS (3.6:1) app/public/stylesheets/main.css:73 — `.nav-sidebar > .active > a` sets color: #fff on background-color: #428bca — 3.6:1, below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Darken or lighten one of them.

AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1

Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no automated accessibility check runs over the HTML your app renders. Assert the accessibility invariants over that HTML in the test suite you already have (parse the output and assert, or drive a browser), and gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 61 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 · TypeValidator.validate (cyclomatic 57) · ×1

TypeValidator.validate (cyclomatic 57) core/app/TypeValidator.scala:174 — TypeValidator.validate has cyclomatic complexity 57 (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 · JsonUtil.validate (cyclomatic 43) · ×1

JsonUtil.validate (cyclomatic 43) core/app/builder/JsonUtil.scala:14 — JsonUtil.validate has cyclomatic complexity 43 (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 · Field.specialize (cyclomatic 18) · ×1

Field.specialize (cyclomatic 18) swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/translators/Field.scala:46 — Field.specialize has cyclomatic complexity 18 (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 · InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cyclomatic 16) api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala:39 — InternalOrganizationsDao.validate has cyclomatic complexity 16 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TypeValidator.validate (cognitive 80) · ×1

TypeValidator.validate (cognitive 80) core/app/TypeValidator.scala:174 — TypeValidator.validate has cognitive complexity 80 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 21 (67 pts), if/else 7 (13 pts) (nesting depth added 52). 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 · Versions.show (cognitive 47) · ×1

Versions.show (cognitive 47) app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:31 — Versions.show has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (19 pts), loops 5 (15 pts), match/switch 2 (13 pts) (nesting depth added 36). 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 · InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cognitive 25) · ×1

InternalOrganizationsDao.validate (cognitive 25) api/app/db/InternalOrganizationsDao.scala:39 — InternalOrganizationsDao.validate has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 pts), match/switch 6 (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 · JsonUtil.validate (cognitive 20) · ×1

JsonUtil.validate (cognitive 20) core/app/builder/JsonUtil.scala:14 — JsonUtil.validate has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 15 (18 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 3). 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 · Versions.postByVersion (cognitive 17) · ×1

Versions.postByVersion (cognitive 17) api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:102 — Versions.postByVersion has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (15 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 10). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (Versions.putByApplicationKeyAndVersion) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Versions.putByApplicationKeyAndVersion (cognitive 17) · ×1

Versions.putByApplicationKeyAndVersion (cognitive 17) api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:150 — Versions.putByApplicationKeyAndVersion has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (15 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 10). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (Versions.postByVersion) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · InternalApplicationsDao.validate (cognitive 17) · ×1

InternalApplicationsDao.validate (cognitive 17) api/app/db/InternalApplicationsDao.scala:57 — InternalApplicationsDao.validate has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), match/switch 5 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 7). 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 · Parser.buildModels (cognitive 17) · ×1

Parser.buildModels (cognitive 17) swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/Parser.scala:90 — Parser.buildModels has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (11 pts), if/else 4 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 8). 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 · DatatypeResolver.parse (cognitive 16) · ×1

DatatypeResolver.parse (cognitive 16) lib/src/main/scala/Kind.scala:72 — DatatypeResolver.parse has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (11 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 10). 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.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (22 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (22 members, 50+ identical tokens) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:354 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:354-365 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:331-342 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:271-282 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:382-393 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:276-287 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:338-349 | generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:268-279 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:318-329 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:318-329 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:336-347 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:307-318 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:293-304 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:327-338 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:327-338 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:318-329 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:309-320 | generated/app/db/UsersDao.scala:304-315 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:340-351 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:316-327 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:300-311 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:306-317 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:249-260 — These 22 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 22 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 22 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (21 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (21 members, 50+ identical tokens) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:163 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:163-190 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:169-192 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:137-158 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:195-220 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:129-152 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:163-188 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:149-174 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:149-174 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:161-186 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:141-166 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:153-174 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:155-180 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:155-180 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:149-174 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:153-176 | generated/app/db/UsersDao.scala:161-182 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:165-190 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:147-172 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:147-170 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:163-184 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:121-142 — These 21 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 21 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 21 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (20 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (20 members, 50+ identical tokens) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:426 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:426-431 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:404-409 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:344-349 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:454-459 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:348-353 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:410-415 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:390-395 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:390-395 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:409-414 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:379-384 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:366-371 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:399-404 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:399-404 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:390-395 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:382-387 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:412-417 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:388-393 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:372-377 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:378-383 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:321-326 — These 20 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 20 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 20 times.

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

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:132 — generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:132-153 | generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:147-170 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:147-170 | generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:206-235 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19–21 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (19–21 lines × 2) api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:128 — api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:128-148 | api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:177-195 — 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 `api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:128` 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) api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:105 — api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:105-124 | api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:154-173 — 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 `api/app/controllers/Versions.scala:105` 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) · ×1

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:98 — api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala:98-114 | api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala:92-108 — before extracting anything, compare `api/app/processor/SyncGeneratorServiceProcessor.scala` and `api/app/util/GeneratorServiceUtil.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 21) · ×1

Duplicated block (14 lines × 21) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:177 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:177-190 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:179-192 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:145-158 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:207-220 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:139-152 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:175-188 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:161-174 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:161-174 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:173-186 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:153-166 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:161-174 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:167-180 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:167-180 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:161-174 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:163-176 | generated/app/db/UsersDao.scala:169-182 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:177-190 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:159-172 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:157-170 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:171-184 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:129-142 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:177` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:175` calls `optionalIn2`, `Seq` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:176` 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (14 lines × 4) generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:140 — generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:140-153 | generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala:157-170 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:157-170 | generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:222-235 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/OriginalsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:140` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:220` calls `optionalIn2`, `Seq` and `generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:139` 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 (14 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) api/app/db/InternalMembershipRequestsDao.scala:135 — api/app/db/InternalMembershipRequestsDao.scala:135-148 | api/app/db/InternalMembershipsDao.scala:168-181 — 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 `api/app/db/InternalMembershipRequestsDao.scala:135` 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, `api/app/db/InternalMembershipRequestsDao.scala:149` calls `Some`, `OrderBy` and `api/app/db/InternalMembershipsDao.scala:182` 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 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:177 — generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:177-187 | generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:211-221 — 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.

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

Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:82 — app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:82-90 | app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:120-128 | app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:139-147 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `app/app/controllers/Versions.scala:82` 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 (6 lines × 22) · ×1

Duplicated block (6 lines × 22) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:360 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:360-365 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:337-342 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:277-282 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:388-393 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:282-287 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:344-349 | generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:274-279 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:324-329 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:324-329 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:342-347 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:313-318 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:299-304 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:333-338 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:333-338 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:324-329 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:315-320 | generated/app/db/UsersDao.scala:310-315 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:346-351 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:322-327 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:306-311 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:312-317 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:255-260 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:360` 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 (5 lines × 20) · ×1

Duplicated block (5 lines × 20) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:427 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:427-431 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:405-409 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:345-349 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:455-459 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:349-353 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:411-415 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:391-395 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:391-395 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:410-414 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:380-384 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:367-371 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:400-404 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:400-404 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:391-395 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:383-387 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:413-417 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:389-393 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:373-377 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:379-383 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:322-326 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. 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 (23 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) api/app/models/MembershipRequestsModel.scala:19 — api/app/models/MembershipRequestsModel.scala:19-41 | api/app/models/MembershipsModel.scala:19-41 — 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 (12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) api/app/lib/Config.scala:26 — api/app/lib/Config.scala:26-37 | app/app/lib/Config.scala:26-37 — before extracting anything, compare `api/app/lib/Config.scala` and `app/app/lib/Config.scala` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 20) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 20) generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:331 — generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:331-339 | generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:308-316 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:248-256 | generated/app/db/ChangesDao.scala:359-367 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationConfirmationsDao.scala:253-261 | generated/app/db/EmailVerificationsDao.scala:315-323 | generated/app/db/MembershipRequestsDao.scala:295-303 | generated/app/db/MembershipsDao.scala:295-303 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:313-321 | generated/app/db/OrganizationDomainsDao.scala:284-292 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:270-278 | generated/app/db/PasswordResetsDao.scala:304-312 | generated/app/db/SubscriptionsDao.scala:304-312 | generated/app/db/TokensDao.scala:295-303 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:286-294 | generated/app/db/VersionsDao.scala:317-325 | generated/app/db/WatchesDao.scala:293-301 | generated/app/db/cache/ServicesDao.scala:277-285 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:283-291 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:226-234 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationMovesDao.scala:331` 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 (7 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 5) generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:383 — generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:383-389 | generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:323-329 | generated/app/db/OrganizationAttributeValuesDao.scala:388-394 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:345-351 | generated/app/db/UserPasswordsDao.scala:361-367 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 53 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/ApplicationsDao.scala:383` 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 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 5) generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:123 — generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:123-131 | generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala:139-147 | generated/app/db/UsersDao.scala:147-155 | generated/app/db/generators/GeneratorsDao.scala:149-157 | generated/app/db/generators/ServicesDao.scala:107-115 — before extracting anything, compare `generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala` and `generated/app/db/OrganizationsDao.scala` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 62 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `generated/app/db/AttributesDao.scala:123` 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 (7 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:320 — generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:320-326 | generated/app/db/SessionsDao.scala:342-348 | generated/app/db/TasksDao.scala:482-488 — 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 all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `generated/app/db/GeneratorInvocationsDao.scala:320` 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.

Minor — 17 finding(s)

D19 · Documentation Quality · Documentation · ×3

Documentation: no project overview app/app/views/doc/start.scala.html — The document begins with a step-by-step 'Getting Started' flow but does not state what the project is for or its main purpose (e.g. API Builder's role in service creation and documentation). Add an overview paragraph explaining that this guide walks through creating an organization, an API Builder service, uploading an example api.json file, viewing generated docs, and downloading client libraries.
Documentation: no installation or build instructions app/app/views/doc/start.scala.html — The document does not show any installation or build steps. Add a short install/dependency section for the project (e.g. sbt setup, Gradle) and how to run the documentation.
Documentation: no usage examples app/app/views/doc/start.scala.html — The 'View your beautiful documentation!' step is present but there are no usage examples of running the guide. Add a one-line command showing how to start the API Builder docs (e.g. curl or an sbt run) so readers can execute it.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 1 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (41377 LoC, 1390 public types across 34 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.

D28 · Secrets (history) · Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1

REDACTED

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1

Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 1 of 91 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 91 of the 249 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: swagger/src/main/scala/io/apibuilder/swagger/SwaggerData.scala. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M1 · Documentation (README) · Thin README · ×1

Thin README — The root README is 13 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.

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.

M2 · Architecture documentation · No architecture diagram/doc · ×1

No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 1/2 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`.

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 2791 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1

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

Minor — 14 finding(s)

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×14

Outdated: com.datadoghq:dd-java-agent — `com.datadoghq %% dd-java-agent` is declared at 1.53.0 in build.sbt, but 1.66.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 1.53.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: com.github.tototoshi:scala-csv_3 — `com.github.tototoshi %% scala-csv_3` is declared at 1.4.0 in build.sbt, but 2.0.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 1.4.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: com.google.inject:guice — `com.google.inject %% guice` is declared at 5.1.0 in build.sbt, but 7.0.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 5.1.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: com.google.inject.extensions:guice-assistedinject — `com.google.inject.extensions %% guice-assistedinject` is declared at 5.1.0 in build.sbt, but 7.0.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 5.1.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: com.rollbar:rollbar-java — `com.rollbar %% rollbar-java` is declared at 2.0.0 in build.sbt, but 2.3.1 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 2.0.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: io.swagger:swagger-parser — `io.swagger %% swagger-parser` is declared at 1.0.61 in build.sbt, but 1.0.76 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 1.0.61 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: joda-time:joda-time — `joda-time %% joda-time` is declared at 2.14.0 in build.sbt, but 2.14.4 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 2.14.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.atteo:evo-inflector — `org.atteo %% evo-inflector` is declared at 1.3 in build.sbt, but 2.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 1.3 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.playframework:play-guice_3 — `org.playframework %% play-guice_3` is declared at 3.0.6 in build.sbt, but 3.0.11 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 3.0.6 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.playframework.anorm:anorm-postgres_3 — `org.playframework.anorm %% anorm-postgres_3` is declared at 2.7.0 in build.sbt, but 3.1.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 2.7.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.postgresql:postgresql — `org.postgresql %% postgresql` is declared at 42.7.7 in build.sbt, but 42.7.13 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 42.7.7 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.typelevel:cats-core_3 — `org.typelevel %% cats-core_3` is declared at 2.12.0 in build.sbt, but 2.13.0 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 2.12.0 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.webjars:bootstrap — `org.webjars %% bootstrap` is declared at 3.3.7 in build.sbt, but 5.3.8 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 3.3.7 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
Outdated: org.webjars:webjars-play_3 — `org.webjars %% webjars-play_3` is declared at 3.0.1 in build.sbt, but 91adf8433c1a7b245f398549138771fb2ff05035 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 3.0.1 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-28dc48b47c6b4d1094857f7703bdf7bc/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	18	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-28dc48b47c6b4d1094857f7703bdf7bc/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	1	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	15	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)	—	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (an sbt build (build.sbt) — not scanned yet).	0	—
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	8	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	0	—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy	disclosure	—	disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)	—	none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (an sbt build (build.sbt) — not scanned yet).	0	—

Run 01a0e9ae-800d-7f7d-a586-c77f89c4a623 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Apicollective/apibuilder

Findings by grade

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Architecture — module dependency matrix

At a glance — Code Health · 90% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Architecture · 49% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

At a glance — Maturity · 47% · Adequate · gated by M1, M2 ·

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

At a glance — Security · 39% · Weak · gated by D28, D29, D36 ·

At a glance — Accessibility · 40% · Weak · gated by AC4, AC6 ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts