Fairnesscoop/permacoop

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

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

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

0 god class(es) detected.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

0 duplicated block group(s) detected.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

No source file's living knowledge is concentrated in a single author.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

The README is clear and well-structured for an open-source ERP project: it states the purpose, shows a GitHub workflow badge, lists the tech stack (Node.js/Nestjs/Nunjucks/WebComponents/TypeORM/PostgreSQL/Typescript/Jest/ts-mockito/Docker), documents prerequisites (PostgreSQL 16.x node-gyp globally), and starts a quickstart install. It also links to dev and deployment docs, which are present but thin on content. The architecture overview and environment table in the deployment doc give concrete structure; the README lacks an explicit features or usage section that would complete its 'features' outline.

What to do

1. Improve Documentation Quality — currently 7.0/10. — The README is clear and well-structured for an open-source ERP project: it states the purpose, shows a GitHub workflow badge, lists the tech stack (Node.js/Nestjs/Nunjucks/WebComponents/TypeORM/PostgreSQL/Typescript/Jest/ts-mockito/Docker), documents prerequisites (PostgreSQL 16.x node-gyp globally), and starts a quickstart install. It also links to dev and deployment docs, which are present but thin on content. The architecture overview and environment table in the deployment doc give concrete structure; the README lacks an explicit features or usage section that would complete its 'features' outline.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · 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.

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

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

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

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

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

What to do

1. Resolve the 4 High finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with ci.yml (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).

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

What it measures: Whether JavaScript/npm dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs) — the npm ecosystem's biggest risk.

Method: JS/npm CVE scan via trivy fs --scanners vuln over JS manifests (package.json/yarn.lock/pnpm-lock/bun.lockb); 0-10 tight normalizer. NotApplicable without JS manifests. Exhaustive, deterministic.

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

No known-vulnerable JS/npm dependencies.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d33_recommendation.md.

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

34 of 42 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is migrations/1606221236110-Invoice.ts.

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.

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

What it measures: Whether dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs) per the OSV database — read natively from whatever lockfile the repository ships (Cargo, npm, Go, Python, Maven, RubyGems, …). D33 and D30 add ecosystem-specific scanners on top for npm and .NET.

Method: Multi-ecosystem dependency-CVE scan via osv-scanner --recursive (queries the osv.dev database + parses lockfiles natively across ecosystems: npm package-lock/yarn/pnpm/bun, Go go.mod, Rust Cargo.lock, Maven/Gradle pom.xml/gradle.lockfile, PyPI requirements.txt/poetry.lock/Pipfile.lock, Composer composer.lock, RubyGems Gemfile.lock, Hex mix.lock, pub pubspec.lock, Swift Package.resolved); severity tally (Critical/High/Medium/Low) to 0-10 tight normalizer (8.0). NotApplicable only when the repo declares no supported non-.NET dependency lockfile (a NuGet-only repo stays NotApplicable — .NET CVEs are D30's domain); coverage needs a resolved lockfile. Additive to D33 (trivy fs); exhaustive + deterministic, DB kept fresh.

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

57 finding(s): 6 critical, 22 high, 21 medium, 8 low.

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

What to do

1. Resolve the 21 High CVE finding(s) in OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with package-lock.json (21). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (21 issue-level).
2. Resolve the 6 Critical CVE finding(s) in OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with package-lock.json (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).
3. Resolve the 1 High vulnerability finding(s) in OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with package-lock.json. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d38_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies — a domain aggregate fused to a persistence ORM (TypeORM/Prisma/MikroORM/Sequelize/Mongoose) on its own declaration (active-record) couples the domain to infrastructure. The clean-architecture dependency rule.

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

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

• Customer is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Customer.entity.ts:3
• Task is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Task.entity.ts:3
• Project is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Project.entity.ts:9
• UserAdministrative is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — UserAdministrative.entity.ts:17
• User is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — User.entity.ts:17
• Event is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Event.entity.ts:14
• Cooperative is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Cooperative.entity.ts:3
• LeaveRequest is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — LeaveRequest.entity.ts:41
• Leave is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Leave.entity.ts:4
• MealTicketRemoval is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — MealTicketRemoval.entity.ts:4
• InterestRate is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — InterestRate.entity.ts:3
• UserSavingsRecord is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — UserSavingsRecord.entity.ts:10
• Notification is a domain type carrying TypeORM (@Entity/@Column) persistence decorators fused ON ITS OWN DECLARATION in the domain layer (with domain behaviour, no separated infrastructure model) — a domain ↔ infrastructure leak: the domain entity IS the persistence row (an active-record fusion). Separate the persistence model from the domain aggregate with a mapper. — Notification.entity.ts:10

What to do

• Keep the ORM/table mapping on a boundary data-model + mapper; leave the domain entity framework-free (map row↔domain through a repository).

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 an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.

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

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

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

What to do

• Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree with `NNNN-title.md` names is the most discoverable form).

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.

• Tests aren't grouped in a dedicated test folder — the test surface isn't separable from production code at a glance.

What to do

• Group tests in the folder your build system expects (tests/, test/, spec/, or your module's test source set) so the test surface is discoverable and CI can scope it.

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.

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.

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

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

• No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security as a CI step.

What to do

• Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
• Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
• Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

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

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

What to do

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

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.

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.

What to do

• Stamp a version in your build/package manifest (e.g. csproj <Version>, package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, or a VERSION file) or tag releases with semver so builds and releases are traceable.

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

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

What to do

• Migrate the remaining .js/.jsx files to TypeScript.

React / JS · Code Health — Copy-pasted token-identical blocks across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386).

Method: Copy-pasted token-identical blocks across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Deterministic.

• src/DataSeeding/Factories/UserFactory.ts:22 · src/DataSeeding/Factories/UserFactory.ts:42 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — UserFactory.ts:22
• src/Infrastructure/Adapter/MattermostNotifier.ts:20 · src/Infrastructure/Adapter/MattermostNotifier.ts:48 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — MattermostNotifier.ts:20
• src/Infrastructure/HumanResource/User/Repository/UserRepository.ts:14 · src/Infrastructure/HumanResource/User/Repository/UserRepository.ts:44 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — UserRepository.ts:14
• src/Application/FairCalendar/Query/GetMonthlyFairCalendarQueryHandler.ts:13 · src/Application/HumanResource/Savings/Command/IncreaseUserSavingsRecordCommandHandler.ts:14 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — GetMonthlyFairCalendarQueryHandler.ts:13
• src/Domain/Notification/Notification.entity.ts:27 · src/Domain/Project/Project.entity.ts:26 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — Notification.entity.ts:27
• src/Infrastructure/Customer/Controller/AddCustomerController.ts:22 · src/Infrastructure/HumanResource/MealTicket/Controller/AddMealTicketRemovalController.ts:24 · src/Infrastructure/Task/Controller/AddTaskController.ts:22 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — AddCustomerController.ts:22
• src/Infrastructure/Customer/Controller/EditCustomerController.ts:41 · src/Infrastructure/Task/Controller/EditTaskController.ts:39 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — EditCustomerController.ts:41
• src/Infrastructure/HumanResource/Leave/Controller/AddLeaveRequestController.ts:48 · src/Infrastructure/HumanResource/Leave/Controller/EditLeaveRequestController.ts:67 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — AddLeaveRequestController.ts:48

What to do

• Extract the duplicated blocks into shared functions/components.

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

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

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

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

React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.

Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.

• No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one. (×8) — humanResource.module.ts, RowFactory.ts, NunjucksTemplates.ts, …

What to do

• Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).

React / JS · Readiness — How outdated the npm dependencies are (a maturity signal). JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D33 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities).

Method: npm dependency staleness from manifest/registry metadata (a maturity signal; JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D33). Deterministic.

• 33 outdated package(s); JS/npm CVEs scored in D33

What to do

• Bump outdated dependencies to current versions to limit upgrade debt.

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

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

• test ✓ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✗

What to do

• Add `tsc --noEmit` as package.json scripts and run them in CI.

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

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

• Unreachable from the 28 application, 35 tooling and 97 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on your build/type-check — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
• no import path from any entry point (28 application, 35 tooling, 97 test roots considered) (×3) — IsPhoneNumberOrEmpty.ts, IsEmailOrEmpty.ts, MonthlyEventsView.ts

What to do

• Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.

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

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

• Imported but not declared in any reachable package.json — installs work only by hoisting accident. (×3) — playwright.config.ts:2, AuthRequiredFilter.ts:9, ExpressSession.ts:1
• Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — dead weight and attack surface. Verify against build tooling before removing. (×3)

What to do

• Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.

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

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

• src/Domain/HumanResource/User/User.entity.ts → src/Domain/HumanResource/User/UserAdministrative.entity.ts → src/Domain/HumanResource/User/User.entity.ts — User.entity.ts

What to do

• Break each cycle by extracting the shared piece into a module both sides can import.