Cloud-native event streaming/messaging platform
Public report — andyx, published 19 Jun 2026. Concrete security findings (CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are hidden in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Watchdog 19-06-2026 @ 21:45 UTC Public
Code Health Audit

Buildersoftio/andyx

32% Poor

Small · 13,571 LoC · 6 projects · rebuild ~0.1 person-years · weakest lens: Readiness (13%)

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

55/59dimensions tool-verifieddeterministic · confidence 1.0 · 4 LLM-assisted, advisory
111findings with an exact file:lineof 153 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
59/92dimensions across the health lenses13571 LoC · 6 projects — wide & deep

Executive summary

Read through the Production lens — the standard calibration. *Green* means good enough to run in production. The score is absolute and comparable across repos.

buildersoftio/andyx carries serious risk (32%). Several issues below can materially affect reliability, security, or the cost of change and warrant near-term attention.

The area that most needs attention is Readiness (13%) — operating, monitoring and recovering the system safely is harder. Code Health (38%) is the next concern — changes there are slower and more error-prone.

Leadership focus, highest impact first: Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions… (Architecture documentation); BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with… (Benchmark discipline); On hot paths, prefer Span<T>/ReadOnlySpan<T>, ArrayPool<T>,… (Allocation hygiene).

For scale: Small (~13,571 production lines); rebuilding it from scratch would take roughly ~0.1 person-years (~1 engineer). Approximate, ±~30%.

Code composition — where the lines go
Business logic 32%Plumbing 68%
New since the last scan (6+)

6 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-06-19) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.App src/Andy.X.App/Andy.X.App.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Model src/Andy.X.Model/Andy.X.Model.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Core src/Andy.X.Core/Andy.X.Core.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.IO src/Andy.X.IO/Andy.X.IO.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Router src/Andy.X.Router/Andy.X.Router.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Utility src/Andy.X.Utility/Andy.X.Utility.csproj

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

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €5,300–€26,000
Cost to rebuild€5,300–€26,000 (0.1–0.2 person-years (88–279 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexityLow — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor0.7× (at 32% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shapeSmall · 39% boilerplate · 29% straight-line · 32% branching logic

This codebase represents roughly ~0.1 person-years of build effort (about ~€16,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 13% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Low (×1.0) — service/app, transaction-script/CRUD × a 0.7× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30%. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

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

1
Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
+3.3 pts · Medium effort · Architecture documentation
2
Add a BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations), and run it in CI to catch regressions.
+2.2 pts · Medium effort · Benchmark discipline
3
On hot paths, prefer Span<T>/ReadOnlySpan<T>, ArrayPool<T>, stackalloc and ValueTask to cut allocations a consumer would otherwise inherit.
+2.2 pts · Medium effort · Allocation hygiene

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Value concentrated against a weak lens · High · Value at risk
This is a Small asset (~0.1 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Readiness at 13%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
Evidence: valuation: Small, ~0.1 person-years rebuild (13,571 LoC) · weakest lens: Readiness 13%
→ 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: Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale. The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

arch Andy.X.App App Andy.X.Router Router Andy.X.App->Andy.X.Router Andy.X.Utility Utility Andy.X.App->Andy.X.Utility Andy.X.Cluster.Sync Sync Andy.X.Model Model Andy.X.Cluster.Sync->Andy.X.Model Andy.X.Core Core Andy.X.IO IO Andy.X.Core->Andy.X.IO Andy.X.Core->Andy.X.Model Andy.X.Core->Andy.X.Utility Andy.X.IO->Andy.X.Model Andy.X.IO->Andy.X.Utility Andy.X.Model->Andy.X.Utility Andy.X.Router->Andy.X.Core Andy.X.Router->Andy.X.Model

At a glance — Code Health · 38% · Poor · gated by X3, X5

At a glance — Architecture · 75% · Healthy

At a glance — Maturity · 48% · Poor · gated by D34, M2

At a glance — Readiness · 13% · Critical · gated by D8, D9, P1, P3, P5, P7, P8

At a glance — Security · 73% · Healthy

At a glance — Performance · 60% · Fair

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components4High / Critical
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration3High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by establishing an ADR log to record significant architectural decisions and their rationale. Next, implement a BenchmarkDotNet project to monitor hot paths for regressions and add security response headers to strengthen the web security posture. Then, optimize hot paths by using Span<T>, ArrayPool<T>, stackalloc, and ValueTask to reduce allocations. Finally, ensure library code uses ConfigureAwait(false) or the CA2007 analyzer to prevent context capture.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.+3.3 ptsMediumArchitecture documentation
Add a BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations), and run it in CI to catch regressions.+2.2 ptsMediumBenchmark discipline
On hot paths, prefer Span<T>/ReadOnlySpan<T>, ArrayPool<T>, stackalloc and ValueTask to cut allocations a consumer would otherwise inherit.+2.2 ptsMediumAllocation hygiene
In library code, append .ConfigureAwait(false) to every await (or set <ConfigureAwait>false</ConfigureAwait> / use the analyzer CA2007) so the library never captures the host's context.+2.2 ptsMediumAsync & latency hygiene
Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness.+1.1 ptsLowKnowledge Freshness
Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.+1.9 ptsMediumWeb-Security Posture
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.+0.8 ptsLowADR Quality
Add policy-based authorization — name the access rules (AddAuthorization(o => o.AddPolicy(…))) and apply them via [Authorize(Policy = …)] or RequireAuthorization.+1.7 ptsMediumAccess Controls

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 39 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 5% slop · 41% mixed · 54% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs3.1SlopChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: CoreService.cs ↔ ComponentSettings.cs
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/SubscriptionEventHandler.cs3.3SlopExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.App/Dockerfile5.1MixedIaC & Container Security: High IaC: DS-0002
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs5.2MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs5.2MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/TenantEventHandler.cs5.2MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProducerEventHandler.cs5.5MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ConsumerEventHandler.cs5.8MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/TopicEventHandler.cs5.8MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
src/Andy.X.Core/Services/App/TenantStateService.cs6.0MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs6.4MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs6.5MixedChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: TenantsController.cs ↔ ICoreRepository.cs
src/Andy.X.Core/Repositories/CoreState/CoreRepository.cs7.0MixedGod Classes: TooManyMethods: CoreRepository
src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs7.0MixedCyclomatic Complexity: ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cyclomatic 24)
src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/NodeEventHandler.cs7.3MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs7.4MixedCognitive Complexity: RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnComponent (cognitive 33)
src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Services/Clusters/IClusterService.cs7.7MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ProducersController.cs7.8MixedCode Duplication: Duplicated block (10 lines × 3)
src/Andy.X.Model/Consumers/Consumer.cs8.0Near-cleanChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: Consumer.cs ↔ ConsumerHubService.cs
src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Repositories/Producers/IProducerHubRepository.cs8.0Near-cleanChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: IProducerHubRepository.cs ↔ ProducerHubRepository.cs

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. 55 of 59 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.7 — 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 — 59 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D8D9D12D13D14D15D16D17D18D19D20D21D22D24D26D27D28D29D30D31D34D35AX1AX10AX2AX3AX5AX6C2GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P5P6P7P8PF1PF2PF3S1X1X2X3X4X5

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions
  1. Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 111 of 153 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
jscpdCode duplication✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.301✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.301✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementQwen/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 019ee1d8-7f6c-7942-a823-00c30a50bbfd.

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.

  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity (jscpd) — it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (EF migration scaffolds, *.Designer.cs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only; the generated footprint is reported separately under Solution Shape.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the suite (`dotnet test --collect`) inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • 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 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (EF migrations, designer files, snapshots) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
  • D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and the advisory database — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen.
  • 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.
  • 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".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.
  • 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 (6): D19, D20, D21, D22, D24, M4 (model: Qwen/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score (documentation, ADR quality, naming, comment value, onboarding) — D25 sets the ADR-conformance fraction over sampled code, D22 judges API accuracy over a sample. These are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync at 24.

ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cyclomatic 24)src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:75

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D2 · Cognitive Complexity8.5 / 10Healthy✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

6 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync at 39.

ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 39)src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:75
RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnComponent (cognitive 33)src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs:116
RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnProduct (cognitive 33)src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs:184
RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnTenant (cognitive 33)src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs:253
ProducerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 19)src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Producers/ProducerHub.cs:58

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 39) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with ConsumerHub.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnComponent… finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with RetentionBackgroundService.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnProduct… finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with RetentionBackgroundService.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D3 · God Classes9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

3 god class(es) detected.

TooManyMethods: CoreRepository · ×3src/Andy.X.Core/Repositories/CoreState/CoreRepository.cs:0
FileTooLong: CoreState/CoreService.cssrc/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:0

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D4 · Code Duplication9.6 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

14 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1045
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×2src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:607
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×2src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ComponentsController.cs:130
Duplicated block (22 lines × 2)src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Data/SubscriptionUnackedDataService.cs:30
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2)src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Outbound/OutboundMessageService.cs:65

+ 6 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D5 · Coupling7.3 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 7.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

Off the main sequence: Andy.X.Utility · ×2

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

3 of 51 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: CoreRepository (LCOM4 10) · ×3src/Andy.X.Core/Repositories/CoreState/CoreRepository.cs:17

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D8 · Code Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How much of the code is actually exercised by tests.

Method: Coverage from coverlet runs or committed reports (Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov), computed per-file with structured exclusions for generated, trivial, and glue code. When the suite can't be built/run in-image AND no report is committed, coverage is reported NOT-MEASURED (excluded from the score) with the precondition to make it measurable — never a LoC-ratio proxy folded in as if measured. Deterministic.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

No automated tests — the solution has no test code.

No automated tests

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d8_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.

Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No test projects found.

No tests found

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

17 outdated, 0 vulnerable, 0 deprecated packages.

Outdated: Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets · ×17

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 of 17 packages use a banned license.

Licenses scanned

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D16 · Bus Factor9.5 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

14 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs, held by eneshoxha@outlook.com.

Small-team knowledge concentration
Off-boarding risk: eneshoxha@outlook.com

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D17 · Explicit Debt5.0 / 10Poor✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

57 deducted debt markers + 0 dead symbols across 13571 LoC (2.5/KLoC) → score 5.0.

EmptyCatchBlock · ×37src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:49
TodoComment · ×19src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Services/Clusters/IClusterHubService.cs:20
CommentedOutCodesrc/Andy.X.Core/Services/App/TenantStateService.cs:168
Justified suppressionsrc/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ConsumerEventHandler.cs:57

What to do

  1. Resolve the 37 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with ComponentEventHandler.cs (9), ProductEventHandler.cs (9), TenantEventHandler.cs (9). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (37 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 19 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with TenantIOService.cs (7), SubscriptionEventHandler.cs (3), NodeEventHandler.cs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (19 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 CommentedOutCode finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with TenantStateService.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. 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.

D18 · Solution Shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the solution is laid out in a sensible, conventional structure.

Method: Solution structure: project count, decomposition, shell-project detection, build success (confirmed failures cap the score); traced to actual .sln files and binaries. Deterministic.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

6 projects, 190 .cs files, 13571 hand-written lines of code (13571 production / 0 test), 15 inter-project edges.

Andy.X.App (Production)src/Andy.X.App/Andy.X.App.csproj
Andy.X.Model (Production)src/Andy.X.Model/Andy.X.Model.csproj
Andy.X.Core (Production)src/Andy.X.Core/Andy.X.Core.csproj
Andy.X.IO (Production)src/Andy.X.IO/Andy.X.IO.csproj
Andy.X.Router (Production)src/Andy.X.Router/Andy.X.Router.csproj

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D19 · Documentation Quality / 10Critical◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Critical / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The project documentation is extremely sparse and lacks technical depth. The README and welcome page are nearly identical, offering only high-level descriptions and links to external resources without explaining the software's architecture, usage, or API. Crucially, there is zero XML documentation coverage across all five code namespaces, meaning there is no inline code documentation for developers. The documentation fails to explain how to use the library or understand its internal structure.

Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.App · ×6src/Andy.X.App/Andy.X.App.csproj

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 Low XML-doc coverage finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with Andy.X.App.csproj, Andy.X.Core.csproj, Andy.X.IO.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).

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

D20 · ADR Quality / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Critical / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

  1. 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.

D21 · Naming Consistency / 10Exemplary◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D22 · Internal API Consistency / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the internal API surface is consistent and coherent.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature over a sample of the public API surface (IsPackable or .Contracts types). Sampled, advisory; confidence discounted by model uncertainty.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

No public API surface exposed; nothing to be inconsistent.

No exposed public API

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d22_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D24 · Comment Value / 10Poor◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on deterministically sampled inline comments with surrounding code; findings verified back to sampled comments by substring match. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Poor / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

12 valuable / 45 redundant across 200 sampled comments; 5 shown with locations.

redundant comment · ×4src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs:182
misleading commentsrc/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Services/Clusters/IClusterService.cs:8

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with CoreService.cs, CoreStateContext.cs, LoggingDependencyInjectionExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 misleading comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with IClusterService.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion6.7 / 10Fair✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 6.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 6 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split Andy.X.Core

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Split Andy.X.Core 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.

D27 · Navigability7.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps.

Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 7.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

99 % of calls cross a namespace and 30 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

High interface indirection

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 High interface indirection finding(s) in Navigability. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D28 · Secrets (history)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Git-history secret scan via gitleaks detect over full history in an isolated checkout; each match flagged High. Exhaustive; degrades cleanly when tool absent.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep --config auto across the repo; severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a 0-10 wide normalizer. 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

semgrep found no security issues.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities7.9 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs), direct or transitive.

Method: NuGet CVE scan via dotnet list package --vulnerable including transitive; severity tally (Critical/High/Medium/Low) to 0-10 tight normalizer. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades when absent.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 7.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

4 vulnerable package(s): 0 critical, 3 high, 1 medium, 0 low.

High CVE: MessagePack 2.1.90 · ×3detected by dotnet list package --vulnerable
Medium CVE: MessagePack 2.1.90detected by dotnet list package --vulnerable

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 0 medium, 1 low.

High IaC: DS-0002 · ×2src/Andy.X.App/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding
Low IaC: DS-0026src/Andy.X.App/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

61 of 61 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs.

Dormant codebase

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D35 · Change Coupling8.1 / 10Healthy✓ 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; coupling through a build step, config, or non-source file isn't seen.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: ICoreRepository.cs↔CoreRepository.cs 81%; IStorageHubService.cs↔StorageHubService.cs 81%; IConsumerHubService.cs↔ConsumerHubService.cs 75%

Boundary-crossing change coupling: CoreService.cs ↔ ComponentSettings.cs · ×5src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs

What to do

  1. Resolve the 5 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with TenantsController.cs (2), Consumer.cs, CoreService.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).

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

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.

Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.

AX10 · Code composition7.0 / 10Healthy✓ 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.

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 — check that business logic isn't leaking into the application/infrastructure layers (a thin domain is the anemic-domain smell).
AX2 · Stateful singletons5.4 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.

Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.

  • `ClusterMemoryRepository` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_mainReplicasAsShards, _currentReplica, _currentShard; e.g. `_mainReplicasAsShards` at line 58). — ClusterMemoryRepository.cs:10
  • `CoreRepository` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_coreStateContext; e.g. `_coreStateContext` at line 27). — CoreRepository.cs:17
  • `InboundMessageService` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (isRunningUnderCluster, shardCount; e.g. `isRunningUnderCluster` at line 330). — InboundMessageService.cs:28

What to do

  • Keep singletons stateless or back their state with thread-safe types (Concurrent*/Immutable*); otherwise concurrent callers race.
AX3 · Project dependency cycles10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

AX5 · Architecture & structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.

Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.

AX6 · Interface segregation9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface member counts; fat-interface threshold (over 15 members) flagged per type. Deterministic, type-level.

  • `IClusterHub` declares 45 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — IClusterHub.cs:7
  • `ICoreRepository` declares 97 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — ICoreRepository.cs:13
  • `IClusterHubService` declares 43 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — IClusterHubService.cs:16
  • `ICoreService` declares 52 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — ICoreService.cs:13

What to do

  • Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
C2 · Access Controls7.0 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether access is authorized by default — [Authorize]/policies or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from handlers.

Method: Roslyn scan: [Authorize] usage and authorization policies, plus imperative throw-on-violation guard methods detected via syntax. Deterministic.

  • Authorization IS enforced here (via [Authorize]/guards) — this is NOT a claim that endpoints are unprotected. What's missing is NAMED policies (AddAuthorization/AddPolicy, RequireRole/RequireClaim, RequireAuthorization): the access rules are implicit rather than named and testable. Recommendation, not a defect — name the rules so they're reviewable.

What to do

  • Add policy-based authorization — name the access rules (AddAuthorization(o => o.AddPolicy(…))) and apply them via [Authorize(Policy = …)] or RequireAuthorization.
GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.

  • A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×8) — ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:139, ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:144, ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:149, …

What to do

  • Finish or delete NotImplementedException stubs and replace placeholder literals before shipping.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs7.1 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords: members that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant, async methods that never await, dead `if (false)` / `#if false` branches, and skeleton types most of whose members are holes. A real, objective slice of technical debt.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

  • `GetReadBytesStatistics` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:137
  • `GetReadKeysStatistics` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:142
  • `GetWriteBytesStatistics` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:147
  • `GetWriteKeysStatistics` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:152
  • `ClusterMetadataSynchronization_AllNodes` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ClusterHubService.cs:51
  • `NotifyProducerMessageArrivedToConsumer` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ProducerHubService.cs:17
  • `NotifyProducerMessageFailed` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ProducerHubService.cs:22
  • `NotifyProducerMessageSent` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — ProducerHubService.cs:27
  • A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×12) — ApplicationService.cs:21, ApplicationService.cs:28, TenantStateService.cs:168, …

What to do

  • Finish or delete the unfinished stubs (NotImplementedException / empty / constant-returning bodies) — they are dead surface that looks live.
  • Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
M1 · Documentation (README)6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
  • 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.
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 — decisions aren't captured for future maintainers.
  • No C4/PlantUML/Mermaid diagram or architecture.md — the high-level shape isn't documented.

What to do

  • Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
  • Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure8.0 / 10Healthy✓ 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.

  • Test projects aren't grouped under a tests/ folder — the test surface isn't separable from production code at a glance.

What to do

  • Group test projects under tests/ (or test/, spec/) so the test surface is discoverable and CI can scope it.
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.

P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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.

  • No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.

What to do

  • Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.

Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • 244/244 types (100%) are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — make internal-by-default and expose only the intended API.

What to do

  • Make types internal by default; expose only the deliberate public API so internals can change without breaking consumers.
P2 · Observability6.2 / 10Fair✓ 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 3/4 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log).

What to do

  • Extend structured logging to the remaining service-like projects so the whole executable surface is diagnosable in production.
  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics and a health-check endpoint for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: CodeQL, Dependabot, secret-scanning, and BenchmarkDotNet presence in pipelines and projects. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No static application security testing (CodeQL / security analyzers / codehealth) detected.

What to do

  • Add a SAST step (e.g. CodeQL) or a security analyzer package.
  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Deployment automation exists but no readiness/liveness probes, rolling-update strategy, lifecycle hooks or migration job were evidenced — a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

What to do

  • Add readiness/liveness probes and a rolling-update (or blue/green) strategy so a bad release is caught and rolled back automatically.
  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P5 · DR & Backup0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether disaster recovery is planned and codified — backups, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees — from IaC + container manifests + docs, never the live cloud.

Method: Filesystem scan: disaster recovery, backup, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees from IaC, manifests, and docs. Exhaustive, deterministic, never a live environment.

  • A persistence guard (data volume / purge-protection) was found, but no backup, geo-recovery or RTO/RPO controls were evidenced — a volume that survives a container recreate is not a tested restore from catastrophic loss.

What to do

  • Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.
P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience3.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether outbound HTTP calls are wrapped in resilience (retry/timeout/circuit-breaker) so a failing dependency doesn't cascade.

Method: Roslyn scan: Polly resilience markers (Retry, CircuitBreaker, Timeout) on outbound HTTP invocations. Computed per type, deterministic.

  • The app makes outbound HTTP calls but no resilience handler was detected (Polly / AddStandardResilienceHandler / circuit-breaker). A slow or failing dependency will cascade — add timeouts, retries with back-off, and a circuit breaker.

What to do

  • Add `AddStandardResilienceHandler()` (or Polly policies) to your HttpClient registrations so a flaky dependency can't take the app down.
P8 · Schema migrations3.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether EF Core schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than the un-evolvable EnsureCreated().

Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage. Exhaustive per project, deterministic.

  • `EnsureCreated()` builds the schema once and can't evolve it — there's no upgrade path for an existing production database, and it bypasses the migrations history. Use EF migrations (`dotnet ef migrations add` + `Migrate()` on startup) so schema changes are versioned and applied safely. — TenantStateService.cs:137

What to do

  • Replace EnsureCreated() with EF migrations so the production schema can evolve safely and reproducibly.
PF1 · Benchmark discipline6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the library protects its performance with benchmarks — a BenchmarkDotNet suite, an allocation MemoryDiagnoser, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.

Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

  • No BenchmarkDotNet suite was found. For a performance-sensitive library, a benchmark guards against silent regressions — but it's a bonus here, not a deduction.

What to do

  • Add a BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations), and run it in CI to catch regressions.
PF2 · Allocation hygiene6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's GC — Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.

Method: Production-source scan: density (per 1k LoC) of allocation-aware APIs — Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

  • No Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc, ValueTask or buffer-writer usage was found. If this library sits on a hot path, these reduce the GC pressure it puts on its host — a bonus, not a requirement.

What to do

  • On hot paths, prefer Span<T>/ReadOnlySpan<T>, ArrayPool<T>, stackalloc and ValueTask to cut allocations a consumer would otherwise inherit.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code keeps its host responsive — a library awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) (so it never captures and stalls the host's context) and avoids sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) that wastes threads and risks deadlock.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) counted everywhere, and — for a library with ≥5 awaits — the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

  • Only 0/25 awaits use ConfigureAwait(false). A library that captures the caller's context can stall or deadlock its host — the classic way a dependency drags an app down.

What to do

  • In library code, append .ConfigureAwait(false) to every await (or set <ConfigureAwait>false</ConfigureAwait> / use the analyzer CA2007) so the library never captures the host's context.
S1 · Web-Security Posture6.5 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Transport security, security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order and crypto hygiene (presence, not runtime).

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

  • No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No CookieSecurePolicy/HttpOnly/SameSite configuration found. (−1.5 on this card; skip if the app sets no cookies.)

What to do

  • Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
  • Set secure cookie flags — CookieSecurePolicy.Always, HttpOnly, and SameSite (Strict/Lax) on auth/session cookies. Skip only if the app sets no cookies.
X1 · Async correctness5.3 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.

  • `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` unless this is a top-level event handler. (×2) — NodeClusterEventService.cs:265, OutboundMessageService.cs:361

What to do

  • async void method: ConnectAsync
X2 · Cancellation propagation4.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether async methods accept a CancellationToken so work can be cancelled (adoption curve).

Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

  • Only 0/15 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so requests can't be cancelled cleanly under load or on client disconnect. In Blazor Server circuits and other short-write hosts, omitting it can be an accepted convention — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter — work can't be cancelled cleanly on disconnect/shutdown. (×15) — NodeClusterEventService.cs:265, SubscriptionTopicData.cs:105, OutboundMessageService.cs:124, …

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X3 · Exception handling3.1 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×25) — ComponentEventHandler.cs:49, ComponentEventHandler.cs:60, ComponentEventHandler.cs:71, …

What to do

  • Swallowed exception (empty catch)
X4 · Structured logging4.5 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. Deterministic.

  • Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. (×25) — ClustersController.cs:44, ClustersController.cs:46, ClustersController.cs:64, …

What to do

  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging
X5 · Nullable reference types2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.

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

  • 0/6 projects enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable>. NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.
  • ~0.0 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.

What to do

  • Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.

Reference — by lens

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

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health38%Poor — gated by X3, X5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture75%HealthyStrongest area.
Maturity48%Poor — gated by D34, M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness13%Critical — gated by D8, D9, P1, P3, P5, P7, P8Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security73%HealthySolid.
Performance60%FairAcceptable, with room to improve.
Not included — 33 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AX4 Dependency direction — not applicable to a transaction-script/CRUD architecture (the inward-dependency rule is for layered/clean styles)
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • D10 Test Quality — No tests in the analyzed solution to assess for quality.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — Bounded contexts not declared
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — Not applicable
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not applicable
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — Not applicable
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — Not applicable
  • D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not applicable
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — No checkable ADRs to assess
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not run — 0/3 markers found
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not run — only 1/3 markers (a message-bus package)
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not run — 0/3 markers found
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — run tests with `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` (or in CI) to enable this cross-layer check
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — no data
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — no data

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.

Issue — 48 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock · ×37
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:49 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:60 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:71 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:88 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:99 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:115 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:134 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:145 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ComponentEventHandler.cs:169 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ConsumerEventHandler.cs:78 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProducerEventHandler.cs:50 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProducerEventHandler.cs:68 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProducerEventHandler.cs:85 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProducerEventHandler.cs:101 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:52 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:64 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:76 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:92 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:103 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:118 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:130 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:141 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ProductEventHandler.cs:154 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/SubscriptionEventHandler.cs:59 — empty catch block
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/SubscriptionEventHandler.cs:74 — empty catch block
  • + 12 more in this group — see findings.md.
D35 · Change Coupling · Boundary-crossing change coupling · ×5
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: CoreService.cs ↔ ComponentSettings.cs src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs — `src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs` (context Andy.X) and `src/Andy.X.Model/Entities/Core/Components/ComponentSettings.cs` (context Andy.X.Model) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 73% of the time (8 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: TenantsController.cs ↔ ICoreRepository.cs src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs — `src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs` (context Andy.X.App) and `src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Repositories/CoreState/ICoreRepository.cs` (context Andy.X) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 69% of the time (11 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: TenantsController.cs ↔ CoreRepository.cs src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs — `src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs` (context Andy.X.App) and `src/Andy.X.Core/Repositories/CoreState/CoreRepository.cs` (context Andy.X) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 65% of the time (13 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: Consumer.cs ↔ ConsumerHubService.cs src/Andy.X.Model/Consumers/Consumer.cs — `src/Andy.X.Model/Consumers/Consumer.cs` (context Andy.X.Model) and `src/Andy.X.Router/Services/Consumers/ConsumerHubService.cs` (context Andy.X.Router) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 65% of the time (11 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: IProducerHubRepository.cs ↔ ProducerHubRepository.cs src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Repositories/Producers/IProducerHubRepository.cs — `src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Repositories/Producers/IProducerHubRepository.cs` (context Andy.X) and `src/Andy.X.Router/Repositories/Producers/ProducerHubRepository.cs` (context Andy.X.Router) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 64% of the time (7 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×3
  • High CVE: MessagePack 2.1.90 — MessagePack 2.1.90 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 6 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
  • High CVE: SQLitePCLRaw.lib.e_sqlite3 2.1.2 — SQLitePCLRaw.lib.e_sqlite3 2.1.2 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 5 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
  • High CVE: System.Text.Json 7.0.0 — System.Text.Json 7.0.0 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 5 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×2
  • High IaC: DS-0002 src/Andy.X.App/Dockerfile — Image user should not be 'root'
  • High IaC: DS-0029 src/Andy.X.App/Dockerfile — 'apt-get' missing '--no-install-recommends'
D8 · Code Coverage · No automated tests · ×1
  • No automated tests — No automated tests — the solution has no test code. Untested code is the largest single risk to changing it safely.
Warning — 57 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×19
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Services/Clusters/IClusterHubService.cs:20 — /*TODO: create a model that has data for synchronization between nodes*/ — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Services/Clusters/IClusterService.cs:8 — //TODO: Implement this Service to enable connection between Nodes with each-other, like in the cluster_configuration.json file. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ConsumerEventHandler.cs:59 — // TODO: Log later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/NodeEventHandler.cs:21 — // TODO: Implement — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/NodeEventHandler.cs:26 — // TODO: Implement — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/SubscriptionEventHandler.cs:40 — // TODO: Not implemented. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/SubscriptionEventHandler.cs:45 — // TODO: Not implemented. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/SubscriptionEventHandler.cs:50 — // TODO: Not implemented. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/NodeClusterEventService.cs:256 — // TODO: add logic to try 5 times, if not destroy the cluster if is the only main in the cluster. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Services/App/TenantStateService.cs:166 — // TODO: I think this block here is useless — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Inbound/InboundMessageService.cs:324 — // TODO: Implement Clustering. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/ClusterIOService.cs:15 — // TODO Add logging later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:15 — // TODO Add logging later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:38 — // TODO Add logging later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:60 — // TODO Add logging later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:116 — //TODO: CREATE db_log FILES HERE. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:132 — // TODO: Add logging later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:139 — //TODO: CREATE db_log FILES HERE. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Andy.X.IO/Services/TenantIOService.cs:155 — // TODO Add logging later — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D19 · Documentation Quality · Low XML-doc coverage · ×6
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.App src/Andy.X.App/Andy.X.App.csproj — Andy.X.App: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/137).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Model src/Andy.X.Model/Andy.X.Model.csproj — Andy.X.Model: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/715).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Core src/Andy.X.Core/Andy.X.Core.csproj — Andy.X.Core: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/504).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.IO src/Andy.X.IO/Andy.X.IO.csproj — Andy.X.IO: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/83).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Router src/Andy.X.Router/Andy.X.Router.csproj — Andy.X.Router: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/112).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Andy.X.Utility src/Andy.X.Utility/Andy.X.Utility.csproj — Andy.X.Utility: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/21).
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×3
  • TooManyMethods: CoreRepository src/Andy.X.Core/Repositories/CoreState/CoreRepository.cs:0 — TooManyMethods — 477 lines, 99 methods.
  • TooManyMethods: CoreService src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:0 — TooManyMethods — 1028 lines, 53 methods.
  • TooManyMethods: ClusterHubService src/Andy.X.Router/Services/Clusters/ClusterHubService.cs:0 — TooManyMethods — 280 lines, 44 methods.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×3
  • Low cohesion: CoreRepository (LCOM4 10) src/Andy.X.Core/Repositories/CoreState/CoreRepository.cs:17 — CoreRepository's methods form 10 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: CoreService (LCOM4 5) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:25 — CoreService's methods form 5 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: ClusterRocksDbDataService (LCOM4 5) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Data/ClusterRocksDbDataService.cs:15 — ClusterRocksDbDataService's methods form 5 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1045 — src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1045-1057 | src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1079-1091
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:77 — src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:77-89 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Producers/ProducerHub.cs:60-72
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:607 — src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:607-618 | src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:636-647
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1414 — src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1414-1425 | src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:1579-1590
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ComponentsController.cs:130 — src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ComponentsController.cs:130-139 | src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TopicsController.cs:172-181
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ProducersController.cs:42 — src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ProducersController.cs:42-51 | src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/SubscriptionsController.cs:53-62
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×2
  • Off the main sequence: Andy.X.Utility — Andy.X.Utility: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Andy.X.Model — Andy.X.Model: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.20, distance 0.80 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cyclomatic 24) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:75 — ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15).
D17 · Explicit Debt · CommentedOutCode · ×1
  • CommentedOutCode src/Andy.X.Core/Services/App/TenantStateService.cs:168 — 3 consecutive commented-code lines
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 39) · ×1
  • ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 39) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:75 — ConsumerHub.OnConnectedAsync has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnComponent (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnComponent (cognitive 33) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs:116 — RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnComponent has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnProduct (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnProduct (cognitive 33) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs:184 — RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnProduct has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnTenant (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnTenant (cognitive 33) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Background/RetentionBackgroundService.cs:253 — RetentionBackgroundService.AnalyzeAndDeleteMessagesBasedOnTenant has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ProducerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • ProducerHub.OnConnectedAsync (cognitive 19) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Producers/ProducerHub.cs:58 — ProducerHub.OnConnectedAsync has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TenantStateService.AddSubscriptionConfiguration (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • TenantStateService.AddSubscriptionConfiguration (cognitive 16) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/App/TenantStateService.cs:178 — TenantStateService.AddSubscriptionConfiguration has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15).
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×1
  • FileTooLong: CoreState/CoreService.cs src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:0 — FileTooLong — 1050 lines, 0 methods.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×1
  • Medium CVE: MessagePack 2.1.90 — MessagePack 2.1.90 (transitive) has a Medium advisory; affects 6 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Data/SubscriptionUnackedDataService.cs:30 — src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Data/SubscriptionUnackedDataService.cs:30-51 | src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Data/SubscriptionUnackedReadonlyDataService.cs:32-53
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Outbound/OutboundMessageService.cs:65 — src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Outbound/OutboundMessageService.cs:65-78 | src/Andy.X.Core/Services/Outbound/OutboundMessageService.cs:104-117
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:104 — src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:104-114 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Producers/ProducerHub.cs:83-93
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ProducersController.cs:142 — src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/ProducersController.cs:142-151 | src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/SubscriptionsController.cs:84-93 | src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/SubscriptionsController.cs:162-171
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/SubscriptionsController.cs:97 — src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/SubscriptionsController.cs:97-104 | src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/SubscriptionsController.cs:175-182
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:193 — src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:193-199 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:201-207 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:209-215 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:230-236
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:173 — src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:173-178 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:253-258 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Producers/ProducerHub.cs:172-177
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:217 — src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:217-222 | src/Andy.X.Router/Hubs/Consumers/ConsumerHub.cs:228-233
Recommendation — 22 finding(s)
D24 · Comment Value · redundant comment · ×4
  • redundant comment src/Andy.X.App/Controllers/TenantsController.cs:182 — "update in memory" — Remove. The code likely shows an in-memory update; if not, rename the variable/method to be more descriptive.
  • redundant comment src/Andy.X.App/Extensions/DependencyInjection/LoggingDependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:19 — "Log.Logger = new LoggerConfiguration()" — Remove. This is a code snippet, not a comment explaining intent.
  • redundant comment src/Andy.X.Core/Services/CoreState/CoreService.cs:128 — "tenant doesnot exists" — Remove. The error handling or null check preceding this comment makes the comment redundant.
  • redundant comment src/Andy.X.Core/Contexts/CoreState/CoreStateContext.cs:48 — "Product Related Tables" — Remove. The class or method name should be sufficient.
D11 · Test Reliability · Test reliability not included · ×1
  • Test reliability not included — No test projects found, so reliability couldn't be assessed.
D16 · Bus Factor · Small-team knowledge concentration · ×1
  • Small-team knowledge concentration — 14 file(s) are concentrated to one author — the ambient state with 2 active author(s), not 14 separate risks. The signal becomes meaningful as ownership spreads; no per-file action implied now.
D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1
  • Off-boarding risk: eneshoxha@outlook.com — If eneshoxha@outlook.com becomes unavailable, 14 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner — the largest single-person knowledge concentration (weighted toward the domain core). Pair, review, or document these before any departure.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found at common paths; consider documenting architectural decisions in Docs/ADL/ or similar.
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Bounded contexts not declared · ×1
  • Bounded contexts not declared — With 13,571 lines of code across 6 projects, the codebase is large and multi-module, indicating distinct concerns that require explicit bounded contexts to assess coupling risks. Declare architecture.contexts (≥2) in config to assess cross-boundary type coupling.
D24 · Comment Value · misleading comment · ×1
  • misleading comment src/Andy.X.Core/Abstractions/Services/Clusters/IClusterService.cs:8 — "TODO: Implement this Service to enable connection between Nodes with each-other, like in the cluster_configuration.json file." — If the code is implemented, remove the TODO. If not, ensure the code matches the TODO description.
D25 · ADR Conformance · no ADRs to check · ×1
  • no ADRs to check — No ADRs found, so conformance can't be assessed.
D26 · Project Cohesion · Split Andy.X.Core · ×1
  • Split Andy.X.Core — The project contains a very high number of public types spread across an excessive number of namespaces, indicating a lack of cohesive responsibility. Suggested: by namespace: group the 51 namespaces into 3-4 distinct architectural layers or domains.
D27 · Navigability · High interface indirection · ×1
  • High interface indirection — 30 % of calls go through an interface — tracing a call means resolving the implementation each hop. Prefer concrete types where there's a single implementation.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×1
  • Low IaC: DS-0026 src/Andy.X.App/Dockerfile — No HEALTHCHECK defined
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside bin/obj (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Dormant codebase · ×1
  • Dormant codebase — 61 of 61 significant files have no living knowledge — the codebase as a whole is dormant, not 61 separate risks. Re-engage owners or document before change.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines.yml, Jenkinsfile, .circleci); there is no build to attest provenance for.
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md, .github/SECURITY.md, docs/SECURITY.md, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No JS/npm lockfile found outside bin/obj (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); nothing for OSV to scan.
D7 · Architectural Integrity · No checkable ADRs to assess · ×1
  • No checkable ADRs to assess — No architecture decision records were found and the project graph is acyclic, so architectural integrity could not be assessed. Add ADRs (with `enforcement: analyzer|test`) to make the architecture's rules checkable.
D9 · Test Distribution · No tests found · ×1
  • No tests found — No test projects found in the repository.
Info — 26 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×17
  • Outdated: Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets — Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets 1.17.0 → 1.23.0 available.
  • Outdated: Serilog.AspNetCore — Serilog.AspNetCore 6.0.1 → 10.0.0 available.
  • Outdated: Serilog.Extensions.Logging — Serilog.Extensions.Logging 3.1.0 → 10.0.0 available.
  • Outdated: Serilog.Sinks.Console — Serilog.Sinks.Console 4.1.0 → 6.1.1 available.
  • Outdated: Swashbuckle.AspNetCore — Swashbuckle.AspNetCore 6.4.0 → 10.2.2 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Newtonsoft.Json — Newtonsoft.Json 13.0.1 → 13.0.4 available.
  • Outdated: protobuf-net — protobuf-net 3.1.25 → 3.2.56 available.
  • Outdated: Cortex.Collections — Cortex.Collections 1.0.0-preview11 → Not available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR.Client — Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR.Client 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: RocksDB — RocksDB 7.7.3.33461 → 10.10.1.1747 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR.Protocols.MessagePack — Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR.Protocols.MessagePack 7.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Newtonsoft.Json — Newtonsoft.Json 13.0.1 → 13.0.4 available.
D14 · License Compliance · Licenses scanned · ×1
  • Licenses scanned — 17 packages scanned; 3 distinct SPDX licenses.
D17 · Explicit Debt · Justified suppression · ×1
  • Justified suppression src/Andy.X.Core/Clusters/Synchronizer/Services/Handlers/ConsumerEventHandler.cs:57 — empty catch (Exception) — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
D18 · Solution Shape · Andy.X.App (Production) · ×1
  • Andy.X.App (Production) src/Andy.X.App/Andy.X.App.csproj — 23 .cs files, 2808 LoC (2278 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Andy.X.Model (Production) · ×1
  • Andy.X.Model (Production) src/Andy.X.Model/Andy.X.Model.csproj — 69 .cs files, 2238 LoC (1760 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Andy.X.Core (Production) · ×1
  • Andy.X.Core (Production) src/Andy.X.Core/Andy.X.Core.csproj — 73 .cs files, 8631 LoC (6827 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Andy.X.IO (Production) · ×1
  • Andy.X.IO (Production) src/Andy.X.IO/Andy.X.IO.csproj — 9 .cs files, 712 LoC (587 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Andy.X.Router (Production) · ×1
  • Andy.X.Router (Production) src/Andy.X.Router/Andy.X.Router.csproj — 10 .cs files, 1976 LoC (1658 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Andy.X.Utility (Production) · ×1
  • Andy.X.Utility (Production) src/Andy.X.Utility/Andy.X.Utility.csproj — 6 .cs files, 170 LoC (133 significant)
D22 · Internal API Consistency · No exposed public API · ×1
  • No exposed public API — No intentionally-exposed types (IsPackable or .Contracts) to evaluate.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaksgitleaks detect --no-banner --report-format json --report-path /dev/stdout --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrepsemgrep --config auto --json --quiet --timeout 0 --metrics off .0
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnetdotnet list Buildersoft.Andy.X.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json4artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivytrivy config --format json --quiet .3artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrepsemgrep: not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.0
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivytrivy: not applicable — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside bin/obj (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.0
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signingprovenanceprovenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines.yml, Jenkinsfile, .circleci); there is no build to attest provenance for.0
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosuredisclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md, .github/SECURITY.md, docs/SECURITY.md, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0
D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilitiesosv-scannerosv-scanner: not applicable — No JS/npm lockfile found outside bin/obj (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); nothing for OSV to scan.0

Run 019ee1d8-7f6c-7942-a823-00c30a50bbfd · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Downloadable artifacts

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

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif