fzyzcjy/flutter_rust_bridge

Executive summary

fzyzcjy/flutter_rust_bridge scores 43 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while seven of its eight lenses score higher still: Domain Modelling at 100 and Architecture at 96, both rated Exemplary, Performance at 78, Maturity at 75 and Code Health at 73, all rated Strong, and Security and Compliance at 61 and Production Readiness at 60, both rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those seven because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Accessibility, which scores 17 and is rated Critical. Its Page structure dimension scores 1 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Accessibility can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh and to keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1, and if Accessibility rose to 70, the score would rise from 43 to about 64.

194 findings are critical: 172 in Static Analysis (SAST), 13 in Secrets (history), five in Secret Scanning and four in Page structure.

Watchdog couldn't measure 14 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 88,101 lines, which would take an estimated 0.6 person-years, around €88,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 73 Strong Architecture 96 ★ Exemplary Maturity 75 Strong Production Readiness 60 Adequate, capped by Secret Scanning Security and Compliance 61 Adequate, capped by Secrets (history), Static Analysis (SAST) and Supply-chain Provenance & Signing Domain Modelling 100 ★ Exemplary Accessibility 17 ⚠ Critical, capped by Page structure and Visual & motion safety Performance 78 Strong

A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.

Accessibility 17 · counts for 45%Production Readiness 60 · counts for 25%Security and Compliance 61 · counts for 14%Code Health 73 · counts for 8%Maturity 75 · counts for 4%Performance 78 · counts for 2%Architecture 96 · counts for 1%Domain Modelling 100 · counts for 1%

If Accessibility rose from 17 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 43 to about 64.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Product code 87%Tests 13%

New since the last survey: 27 findings

These 27 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 9 October 2026.

Secret Scanning · REDACTED
Secret Scanning · REDACTED
Secret Scanning · REDACTED
Secret Scanning · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard website/src/css/custom.css

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

Fixed since the last survey: 11 findings

These 11 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 9 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair: frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/mod.rs frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/mod.rs
Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair: frb_codegen/src/main.rs frb_codegen/src/main.rs
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/rust_ui_todo_list/ui/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/rust_ui_todo_list/ui/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/ci_plan/api.dart
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/precommit_autofix.dart
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/precommit_autofix_in_dev_container.dart
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/quickstart_smoke.dart
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking REDACTED

Rebuild cost: about €88,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€29,000 to €150,000, for 485 to 1,540 hours of work, about 0.6 person-years for 1 to 2 engineers
Difficulty of the problem	Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor	×0.7 at a score of 43. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size	Medium: 88,101 lines of product code

How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.

Top priorities

The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.

Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.

Raises the score by about 11 points · Medium effort · Page structure

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

Raises the score by about 11 points · Medium effort · Visual & motion safety

Enforce accessibility in the toolchain your project already uses: assert accessibility in your UI test suite with your toolkit's own matcher (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.

Raises the score by about 7 points · Medium effort · A11y enforcement

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk

This code would cost about €88,000 to build again, about 0.6 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Accessibility, at 17 (Critical). Accessibility is about whether the interface is built so that everyone can use it, including people who can't see the screen or can't use a mouse. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Accessibility also moves the score most.

Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Accessibility grade · how much each lens counts

What to do: Start with the Accessibility actions in Top priorities.

If you do one thing first · First action

Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 11 points for medium effort. The next survey will show the change in the score.

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

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.

949 modules, with 2677 dependencies between them. 7 loops run through 18 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 909 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	1 example.api	2 flutter_rust_bridge.generalized_arc.base_arc	3 flutter_rust_bridge.generalized_isolate.web.into_dart	4 flutter_rust_bridge.misc.into_into_dart	5 flutter_rust_bridge.platform_types.io	6 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.misc.target	8 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.misc	9 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.utils.namespace	10 flutter_rust_bridge.rust2dart.action	11 flutter_rust_bridge.stream.stream_sink	12 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.acc	13 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.api_dart.internal_config	14 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.wire.dart.internal_config	15 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.hir.flat.function	16 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.ty	17 flutter_rust_bridge.codec.sse	19 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.misc.path_texts	21 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.func	22 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.ty.rust_opaque	23 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.assets.integration_template.shared.shared.REPLACE_ME_RUST_CRATE_DIR.src.frb_generated	24 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.dumper	25 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.pack	26 flutter_rust_bridge.dart_opaque	27 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.api_dart.spec_generator.base	28 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.codec.structs	29 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.wire.rust.spec_generator.codec.cst.base	30 frb_example_pure_dart.auxiliary.new_module_system.sub_module	31 frb_example_pure_dart.auxiliary.old_module_system.sub_module	32 frb_example_pure_dart.auxiliary.sample_types	35 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.parser.mir.internal_config	36 frb_example_pure_dart.frb_generated	38 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.parser.mir
1 example.api
2 flutter_rust_bridge.generalized_arc.base_arc
3 flutter_rust_bridge.generalized_isolate.web.into_dart
4 flutter_rust_bridge.misc.into_into_dart
5 flutter_rust_bridge.platform_types.io
6 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.misc.target
7 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.misc
8 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.misc
9 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.utils.namespace
10 flutter_rust_bridge.rust2dart.action			1
11 flutter_rust_bridge.stream.stream_sink			1	1
12 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.acc						1
13 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.api_dart.internal_config						1
14 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.wire.dart.internal_config						1
15 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.hir.flat.function								1
16 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.ty								1
17 flutter_rust_bridge.codec.sse									1
18 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.config.internal_config												1	1
19 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.misc.path_texts						1					1
20 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.hir.flat.pack								1						1
21 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.func								2							1
22 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.ty.rust_opaque								1							2
23 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.assets.integration_template.shared.shared.REPLACE_ME_RUST_CRATE_DIR.src.frb_generated		1	1	1	1				1	1						2
24 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.dumper											1						1
25 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.ir.mir.pack								1							5			1
26 flutter_rust_bridge.dart_opaque			2	1												2				2
27 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.api_dart.spec_generator.base												1										1
28 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.codec.structs															1							1
29 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.wire.rust.spec_generator.codec.cst.base												1	1									1
30 frb_example_pure_dart.auxiliary.new_module_system.sub_module			2	1												2				2
31 frb_example_pure_dart.auxiliary.old_module_system.sub_module			2	1												2				2
32 frb_example_pure_dart.auxiliary.sample_types	2		6	3												6				6
33 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.wire.dart.spec_generator.base												1	1									1		1
34 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.generator.wire.rust.spec_generator.base												1	1									1				1
35 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.parser.mir.internal_config								1											1						2
36 frb_example_pure_dart.frb_generated		1	7	3	1	4			1	1						8				10			1
37 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.parser.hir.internal_config							1																							1
38 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.parser.mir																					1									1
39 frb_example_pure_dart.frb_generated.io	1				1															357							1	1	1		2
40 flutter_rust_bridge_codegen.library.codegen.parser.mir.parser.ty								3							2			1	2						1							1

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 73% · Strong ·

The Good

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 10.0 D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 9.2 D3 · Rust God Classes 9.7 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.9 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 9.8 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 9.2

The Bad

X3 · Repo Exception handling 6.9

The Ugly

X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 4.0

At a glance — Architecture · 96% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 9.1 D6 · Rust Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 9.0 D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 7.8 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.3 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

At a glance — Maturity · 75% · Strong ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 8.0 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.5 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 8.5

The Bad

M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 5.0

The Ugly

D20 · Rust ADR Quality 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 60% · Adequate · gated by D13 ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D14 · Rust License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 7.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Bad

P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 6.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0

The Ugly

D13 · Rust Secret Scanning 0.0 P2 · Repo Observability 4.9

At a glance — Security · 61% · Adequate · gated by D28, D29, D36 ·

The Good

D30 · Rust Dependency Vulnerabilities 8.1 D31 · Rust IaC & Container Security 9.7 D37 · Rust Vulnerability-disclosure Policy 10.0 D43 · Rust Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · Rust Platform End-of-Life 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0

The Ugly

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 0.0 D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 0.6 D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 0.0

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

DM4 · Repo Rich vs anemic domain model 10.0 DM5 · Repo Encapsulated state 10.0

At a glance — Accessibility · 17% · Critical · gated by AC3, AC6 ·

The Ugly

AC3 · Repo Page structure 1.0 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 1.0 AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

At a glance — Performance · 78% · Strong ·

The Good

PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 9.0 PF2 · Repo Allocation hygiene 9.6

The Bad

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 6.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A05:2025 — Injection	181	High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures	19	High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	19	Medium
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration	10	Medium

Roadmap

First, establish a solid page structure by adding essential semantic landmarks and ensuring proper heading order, while simultaneously fixing visual safety issues like low contrast and missing focus styles. Next, enforce accessibility standards by integrating automated checks into your existing UI test suites and gating them in CI to prevent regressions. Finally, immediately resolve all identified secret leaks in both current code and history, prioritizing files such as REDACTED and REDACTED to secure the codebase.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.	+11.0 pts	Medium	Page structure
Keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1.	+11.0 pts	Medium	Visual & motion safety
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain your project already uses: assert accessibility in your UI test suite with your toolkit's own matcher (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.	+6.6 pts	Medium	A11y enforcement
Resolve the 5 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED.	+2.5 pts	Low	Secret Scanning
Resolve the 13 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (9), REDACTED (4).	+1.6 pts	Medium	Secrets (history)
Resolve the 9 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED (4), REDACTED.	+0.7 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.	+0.6 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.	+0.8 pts	Medium	Observability

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 104 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 5% slop · 30% mixed · 65% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.0	Slop	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	0.7	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.3	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	2.3	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.7	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.8	Mixed	Secrets (history): High secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	6.1	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: Medium CVE: REDACTED
frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/real/mod.rs	6.7	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/delegate.rs	6.9	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
frb_utils/lib/src/serve_web/run_server.dart	6.9	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
REDACTED	6.9	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: Medium CVE: REDACTED
frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs	7.1	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (16 lines × 2)
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED

How the grades work

Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.

Critical — 194

A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here tends to cause failures elsewhere.

Serious — 188

Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to carry for two years either.

Minor — 73

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

Could not be resolved — 15

Something this survey could not settle from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each one is named under Limitations.

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 68 of 72 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 0.9 — 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 — 72 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D13D14D15D17D19D20D21D22D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D37D43D44AC3AC6AC7AX10AX3AX4AX8AX9DM4DM5M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6PF1PF2PF3X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X5

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 438 of 455 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a16970-6bb9-7f86-b27e-edcc9f693410.

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.

D4 Code Duplication — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The 18 duplicated block group(s) on this row were found in the languages this pass could tokenize, and they do NOT cover all of this repository's production source: .c (17,054 lines, 18% of production source), .cpp (3,824 lines, 4% of production source), .cc (1,152 lines, 1% of production source) went unread, because no language model this pass could load exposed a clone-unit token stream for those file kinds. Duplication in that source is UNMEASURED — its absence from the count above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that the code is free of duplication.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT READ here — but this repository measures it: a coverage step in CI (`codecov/codecov-action`) shows that coverage is collected and tracked in your own CI. The built-in collector has no runner for this ecosystem (.dart, .swift, .rs), so the analyzer could not read the number — a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not an unmeasured repo. Not scored. To have the real number read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `flutter test --coverage` (or `dart test --coverage=coverage` then `dart run coverage:format_coverage --lcov`), or lcov — `swift test --enable-code-coverage` (SwiftPM) or `xcodebuild test -scheme <YourScheme> -enableCodeCoverage YES` (an .xcodeproj/.xcworkspace suite), then `xcrun llvm-cov export -format=lcov`, or lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `flutter test --coverage` (or `dart test --coverage=coverage` then `dart run coverage:format_coverage --lcov`), or lcov — `swift test --enable-code-coverage` (SwiftPM) or `xcodebuild test -scheme <YourScheme> -enableCodeCoverage YES` (an .xcodeproj/.xcworkspace suite), then `xcrun llvm-cov export -format=lcov`, or lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.dart, .swift, .rs) but the built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem, so flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 29 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 0 dependency(ies) and leaving 0 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. This repository declares a Dart pubspec.yaml, but the licence verdict published here was taken over its crate dependencies. Nothing was read about its Dart dependencies' licensing in either direction, and a clean score on this card must not be read as covering them.
D14 License Compliance — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. This repository declares package.json, but the licence verdict published here was taken over its crate dependencies. Nothing was read about its npm dependencies' licensing in either direction, and a clean score on this card must not be read as covering them.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (85 contributor(s) across 20000 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 97% of the history; the other 84 hold 0% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D26 Project Cohesion — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Project size and spread are measured over build units whose source a code model reads. This repository's .c, .cpp, .cc source is a material share of its production lines and was read by none, so the score is a verdict about the units that were read. Not a finding that the unread source is cohesive — it is unmeasured.
D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via REDACTED (REDACTED). docker build failed (exit 56) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped.
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check decides whether a handler's mutation is safe to re-run by recognising its persistence writes (a database save, a repository write, an event publish) and its guards. Those markers are .NET member names, so in this repository's language a write such as `repository.save(order)` is not recognised and a same-named call on an unrelated library type could be. The handlers were found; their idempotency was neither confirmed nor ruled out.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Python, Rust, c is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Python, Rust, c is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
M4 Documentation accuracy — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 31 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 71.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 7 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 47.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
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.
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.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
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.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
DM4 Rich vs anemic domain model: Behaviour is detected as state mutation inside a method body — a method that enforces an invariant by validating-and-throwing without mutating reads as a query, and mutation delegated through an interface the scan can't resolve isn't credited; entities with zero public properties still drop out of the population. It detects that state changes, not whether the rule is correct.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D22, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity10.0 / 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15. A further 6 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being TypeParserWithContext::parse_type_path_data_concrete at 25 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 4 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/delegate.rs (MirTypeDelegate::rust_api_type at 25), frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/ty/concrete.rs (TypeParserWithContext::parse_type_path_data_concrete at 25), tools/vmware_windows/frb_vmware_windows_env.py (frb_vmware_windows_env.dispatch at 17), .claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py (categorize_code_diff._parse_diff at 16). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity9.2 / 10Stronggated by 5 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

5 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was categorize_code_diff._rust_test_lines at 22.

FunctionParser::parse_owner (cognitive 19) · ×2frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/real/owner.rs:21

categorize_code_diff._rust_test_lines (cognitive 22).claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py:186

categorize_code_diff._mask_rust_comments_and_strings (cognitive 21).claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py:217

codecov_analyzer._changed_new_lines_by_file (cognitive 16).claude/skills/frb-fix-codecov/codecov_analyzer.py:286

What to do

Bring the 5 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with categorize_code_diff._rust_test_lines (cognitive 22), categorize_code_diff._mask_rust_comments_and_strings (cognitive 21), FunctionParser::parse_owner (cognitive 19). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 5 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 9.2 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes9.7 / 10Stronggated by 6 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

6 god class(es) detected.

FileTooLong: vmware_windows/frb_vmware_windows_env.py · ×5tools/vmware_windows/frb_vmware_windows_env.py

TooManyFields: GenerateCommandArgsPrimaryfrb_codegen/src/binary/commands.rs:63

What to do

Resolve the 5 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with frb_vmware_windows_env.py, frb_dev_env.py, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 TooManyFields finding(s) in God Classes — start with commands.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.9 / 10Stronggated by 18 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

18 duplicated block group(s) detected. 14 of the 18 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population. Measured on part of this repository only: .c, .cpp, .cc (23% of production source) was not exposed to the token comparison, so duplication there is unmeasured and is not in this count.

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×3frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/cst/entrypoint.rs:22

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×2frb_codegen/src/main.rs:43

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×2frb_codegen/src/library/integration/creator.rs:129

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2).claude/skills/frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py:1305

Duplicated block (13 lines × 8)frb_codegen/assets/integration_template/shared/app/lib/main.dart:13

+ 9 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with entrypoint.rs (2), body.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with main.rs, chrono_type.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with creator.rs, benchmark_api.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

9 production modules (Gradle+Cargo+pub), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; edges a convention plugin adds from buildSrc or build-logic are not visible there; 1 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 6 of the 9 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: flutter_rust_bridge (pub)

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)10.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

1 of 723 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: RustOpaqueBase (LCOM4 5)frb_rust/src/rust_opaque/mod.rs:11

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

802 test methods: 799 unit, 3 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 773 `#[test]` function(s) across 289 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 1 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

2 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 5 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Enforce Secret Scanning in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 of 210 shipped crate(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from crates.io over the crates a consumer compiles — this repository's REDACTED closed over its manifests' `[dependencies]` and `[build-dependencies]`. Crates it asks for ONLY under `[dev-dependencies]` are excluded: they are not compiled by anything that depends on this repository. This repository publishes itself under MIT, which is its own choice and is not judged here. ★ COVERAGE OF THIS VERDICT: it grades this repository's crate dependencies and nothing else. The repository also declares a Dart pubspec.yaml and package.json, and the licences of those dependency graphs were NOT read by this pass — a gap in this engine's coverage, not a statement about them. So this result says the graded closure carries no banned licence; it does NOT say this repository's licensing is clear.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window. Repeated repair below the complexity floor: frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs (4 of 6 changes were fixes); frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_migrator.rs (3 of 5 changes were fixes); frb_codegen/src/library/integration/utils.rs (3 of 4 changes were fixes)

Repeated repair: frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs · ×3frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs:46

What to do

Resolve the 3 Repeated repair finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with rust_path_parser.rs, rust_path_migrator.rs, utils.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt9.8 / 10Stronggated by 77 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

77 deducted task-comment markers across 88101 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.8. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×70frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/acc.rs:25

HackComment · ×6frb_codegen/src/library/commands/dart_build_runner.rs:55

XxxCommentfrb_dart/lib/src/utils/single_complete_port.dart:5

What to do

Resolve the 70 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with mod.rs (6), rust_opaque.rs (4), delegate.rs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (70 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 HackComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with dart_build_runner.rs, test_utils.dart, moi_arc.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 XxxComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with single_complete_port.dart. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README is excellent: it states what the project is (a Flutter/Dart/Rust binding generator) with logos, a crate/ci/pub.dev link, and a detailed What's new in V2 section that expands on each feature. The body then documents subdirectories such as book/, frb_codegen/, frb_dart/, etc., each of which is an internal package or directory not the root repo, per their own READMEs. All visible documentation is complete: no missing overview, installation, usage, contributing, or license; the only unifying element across all these documents is that they are subdirectories of the root and document what they contain rather than the repository as a whole. (9 of 25 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 2 evaluation groups failed.)

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — The repository's root README is excellent: it states what the project is (a Flutter/Dart/Rust binding generator) with logos, a crate/ci/pub.dev link, and a detailed What's new in V2 section that expands on each feature. The body then documents subdirectories such as book/, frb_codegen/, frb_dart/, etc., each of which is an internal package or directory not the root repo, per their own READMEs. All visible documentation is complete: no missing overview, installation, usage, contributing, or license; the only unifying element across all these documents is that they are subdirectories of the root and document what they contain rather than the repository as a whole. (9 of 25 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 2 evaluation groups failed.)

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyStronggated by 2 serious findings◐ 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Strong / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

2 API inconsistencies across 72 exposed types.

Duplicate method name with different semantics/ownership implications. `BaseArc::into_inner` consumes the Arc to return the value (standard Arc behavior), whereas `RustOpaqueBase::into_inner` likely consumes the opaque handle to return the inner value, but the naming suggests identical behavior across different resource management models (Arc vs Opaque).

Ambiguous naming convention for async vs sync access. `RustAutoOpaqueBase` exposes both `read` and `blocking_read`. In async contexts, `read` often implies a non-blocking or future-returning operation, but here it returns a synchronous `RwLockReadGuard`. This is confusing for users who might expect `read` to be the primary async-safe method. Similarly for `write` vs `blocking_write`.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Duplicate method name with different semantics/ownership implications.… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Ambiguous naming convention for async vs sync access.… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion7.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 9 build units (Cargo, npm, pub) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent. This repository's .c, .cpp, .cc source was read by no build unit, so this covers part of the tree, not all of it.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

13 finding(s): 0 critical, 13 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 13 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (9), REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

182 finding(s): 0 critical, 172 high, 10 medium, 0 low. 159 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 4 file(s) — `REDACTED` (lines 141–164), `frb_rust/src/dart_api/dart_api.h` (line 271, line 282, line 296, …), `frb_rust/src/dart_api/dart_tools_api.h` (line 103, line 120, line 165, …), `tools/vmware_windows/run_packer_build.zsh` (line 151) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 4 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

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

What to do

Resolve the 9 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED (4), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 159 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (159 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

10 finding(s): 0 critical, 0 high, 10 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 3 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Medium advisory (unsound) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Medium advisory (unmaintained) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.7 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

10 finding(s): 0 critical, 0 high, 0 medium, 10 low.

REDACTED

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 340 of the 1023 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

+ 2 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.

Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.

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

A vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md) is published with a reporting contact.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d37_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 20 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AC3 · Page structure1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en"). (×2) — frb_example/dart_build_rs/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1, frb_example/dart_minimal/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1
A page with no <title> gives no name in the tab, history or screen-reader page list. Add a descriptive <title> in <head>. (×2) — frb_example/dart_build_rs/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1, frb_example/dart_minimal/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1
No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. (×2) — frb_example/dart_build_rs/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1, frb_example/dart_minimal/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1

What to do

Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC6 · Visual & motion safety1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

`.my-simple-spin` moves (`animation: my-simple-spin-keyframes 1.2s linear infinite`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce. — website/src/css/custom.css:46

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No accessibility enforcement found — no accessibility linting at author time and no automated accessibility check in tests or CI. Add your UI toolkit's own accessibility assertion to the test suite (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in the pipeline. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 10 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

Enforce accessibility in the toolchain your project already uses: assert accessibility in your UI test suite with your toolkit's own matcher (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX10 · Code composition9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX8 · Test isolation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether production projects stay free of references to test projects — tests may depend on production, never the reverse.

Method: Csproj graph: each production project checked for references to test projects (identified by test-framework presence, not name). Zero violations is clean. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX9 · CQS / query purity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether read (query) handlers stay side-effect-free — a query that writes persistent state or raises events breaks CQS and makes reads unsafe to retry, cache, or route to a read replica.

Method: Roslyn scan: CQRS handlers classified query-vs-command by interface (IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler<TQuery,TResult>) and name convention (*Query/Get*/Find* vs *Command); each query handler's body checked for persistent-state writes (SaveChanges/repository Add-Update) or event publishes by resolved invocation. Deterministic, type-level, exhaustive over the detected handlers.

Coverage: Population: CQRS handlers identified by IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler interface + *Query/Get*/Find*/*Command NAME convention; query purity then checked exhaustively within that set — a query handler using neither convention is invisible, and mutation is a resolved persistence/publish CALL, not full dataflow.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM4 · Rich vs anemic domain model10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether domain entities own their behaviour (invariant-enforcing commands) rather than being data-only structs driven by a foreign service.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): entity method BODIES classified mutator-vs-query — only methods that mutate the entity's own declared state count as invariant-protecting behaviour, so a getter/passthrough doesn't rescue an anemic class. Deterministic, exhaustive over domain-layer entities.

Coverage: Population: entities by name/base convention; rich-vs-anemic judged by classifying each method body mutator-vs-query — logic-bearing domain types outside the convention are invisible.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM5 · Encapsulated state10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether a domain type's identity-bearing field stays immutable — a `pub` mutable field under a hand-rolled Hash/PartialEq breaks the value-identity invariant.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): entities scanned for publicly writable state — public setters, and (C#/VB) own mutable collections handed out through an auto-property, a public field or a bare-field expression getter, where a computed/copying getter is never charged. One finding per entity; score softened when Marten/EF rehydration frameworks present. Deterministic, framework-aware.

Coverage: Population: entities by convention; encapsulation (setter shape) checked exhaustively within the set.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add a README to the 59 of 64 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.8 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy8.5 / 10Strong◐ 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.

tools/tart_macos/README.md documents the environment variable `PROXY_PORT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — tools/tart_macos/README.md:124
website/docs/quickstart.md links to `guides/miscellaneous/pure-dart`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/pure-dart` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/quickstart.md:110
website/docs/quickstart.md links to `manual/integrate/overview`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/quickstart.md:126
website/docs/quickstart.md links to `guides/miscellaneous/directory`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/directory` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/quickstart.md:139
website/docs/quickstart.md links to `demo`, but `website/docs/demo` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/quickstart.md:209
website/docs/manual/troubleshooting.md links to `./miscellaneous/wasm-limitations`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/wasm-limitations` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/troubleshooting.md:149
website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md links to `submodules/cst-codec`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md:129
website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md links to `submodules/dco-codec`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/dco-codec` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md:129
website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md links to `../miscellaneous/codec`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/codec` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md:140
website/docs/guides/functions/eq-hash.md links to `../misc-features/dart-code`, but `website/docs/guides/misc-features/dart-code` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/functions/eq-hash.md:26
website/docs/guides/functions/methods.md links to `../third-party/manual/external-types`, but `website/docs/guides/third-party/manual/external-types` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/functions/methods.md:7
website/docs/guides/how-to/build-release.md links to `../../manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/how-to/build-release.md:14
website/docs/guides/how-to/cross-origin.md links to `../../manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/how-to/cross-origin.md:9
website/docs/guides/how-to/debug.md links to `./logging`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/logging` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/how-to/debug.md:25
website/docs/guides/how-to/regression.md links to `../miscellaneous/safety`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/safety` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/how-to/regression.md:3
website/docs/guides/how-to/report-error.md links to `stack-trace`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/stack-trace` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/how-to/report-error.md:11
website/docs/guides/how-to/rust-compilation.md links to `../../manual/integrate/overview`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/how-to/rust-compilation.md:7
website/docs/guides/misc-features/ignoring.md links to `../functions/ignoring`, but `website/docs/guides/functions/ignoring` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/misc-features/ignoring.md:7
website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/codec.md links to `../performance/overview`, but `website/docs/guides/performance/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/codec.md:49
website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/deployment.md links to `../../manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/deployment.md:6
website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:30
website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `template`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/template` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:31
website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `existing`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/existing` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:32
website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `library`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/library` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:33
website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `dart-workspace`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/dart-workspace` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:34
website/docs/manual/integrate/02-builtin.md links to `overview`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/02-builtin.md:3
website/docs/manual/integrate/02-builtin.md links to `../../quickstart`, but `website/docs/quickstart` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/02-builtin.md:3
website/docs/manual/integrate/03-native-assets.md links to `migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/03-native-assets.md:31
website/docs/manual/integrate/04-cargokit.md links to `native-assets`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/native-assets` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/04-cargokit.md:7
website/docs/manual/integrate/04-cargokit.md links to `migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/manual/integrate/04-cargokit.md:22
website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec.md links to `When`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/When` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec.md:134
website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec.md links to `These`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/These` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec.md:135
website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec.md links to `Refers`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/Refers` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec.md:137
website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/dco-codec.md links to `This`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/This` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/dco-codec.md:47
website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/manual-test.md links to `../../miscellaneous/safety`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/safety` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/manual-test.md:3
website/docs/guides/custom/codegen/inputs.md names `.flutter_rust_bridge.yml`, but no file or folder `.flutter_rust_bridge.yml` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/custom/codegen/inputs.md:21
website/docs/guides/custom/codegen/inputs.md names `.flutter_rust_bridge.yaml`, but no file or folder `.flutter_rust_bridge.yaml` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/custom/codegen/inputs.md:22
website/docs/guides/custom/dart/constructors.md links to `../../how-to/test`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/test` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/custom/dart/constructors.md:17
website/docs/guides/custom/dart/constructors.md links to `../../how-to/inspect`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/inspect` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/custom/dart/constructors.md:18
website/docs/guides/custom/dart/constructors.md links to `../../how-to/load-library`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/load-library` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — website/docs/guides/custom/dart/constructors.md:19

What to do

Reconcile the README with reality: tools/tart_macos/README.md documents the environment variable `PROXY_PORT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; website/docs/quickstart.md links to `guides/miscellaneous/pure-dart`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/pure-dart` does not exist; website/docs/quickstart.md links to `manual/integrate/overview`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/overview` does not exist; website/docs/quickstart.md links to `guides/miscellaneous/directory`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/directory` does not exist; website/docs/quickstart.md links to `demo`, but `website/docs/demo` does not exist.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

4556/5024 types (91%) declared in the published library are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — keep implementation types off the surface and expose only the intended API.

What to do

Keep implementation types off the public surface (Dart: a `_` name, or keep it under `lib/src/` unexported; Rust: `pub(crate)`, or keep the module private; Swift: leave it `internal` (the default) instead of `public`) so internals can change without breaking consumers.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability4.9 / 10Weak✓ 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 13/45 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`, `frb_example/dart_build_rs`, `frb_example/dart_minimal`, `frb_example/deliberate_bad`, `frb_example/deliberate_bad/rust` and 27 more.

What to do

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Dependabot is configured but does not watch `github-actions`, `npm`, `gradle`, `gitsubmodule` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF1 · Benchmark discipline9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code protects its performance with benchmarks — a benchmark suite, allocation/memory measurement, 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; off .NET, the same ladder over Go testing.B, Rust criterion/#[bench]/divan, JMH/kotlinx-benchmark, pytest-benchmark/asv/pyperf, tinybench/mitata/vitest bench/benchmark.js and Swift package-benchmark — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF2 · Allocation hygiene9.6 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 95 use(s) across 13,249 production line(s) (~7.2/1k). More of the idioms below on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
Dart: on hot paths, hold numbers in dart:typed_data lists (Int32List, Float64List …) instead of boxed List<int>/List<double>, read through views (sublistView, buffer.asInt32List, asByteData) instead of copying, make lists that never grow growable: false, compute in the SIMD types (Float32x4List …), and build bytes with BytesBuilder(copy: false).

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

`_getPrecompiledArtifacts` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs. (×7) — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99, …
`_tryDownloadArtifacts` is async and calls writeAsBytesSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs. (×7) — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184, …
`build` is async and calls copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs. (×7) — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19, …
`build` is async and calls createSync, copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs. (×7) — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22, …
`build` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs. (×6) — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20, …
`run` is async and calls createSync, readAsBytesSync, deleteSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs. (×6) — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54, …

What to do

Dart: await the async dart:io API (readAsString, writeAsString, Process.run, Future.delayed) instead of the *Sync variant or sleep(), or move heavy synchronous work to another isolate with Isolate.run.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X12 · Unreachable branch10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X13 · Undrained process stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X14 · Bypassable address classification10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X16 · Unfloored truncation loop10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X19 · Unrestored process-global state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Code Health — Whether functions that make a cancellable request accept or pass on a CancelToken (adoption curve).

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

Only 0/4 functions that make a cancellable request (Dio, AbortableRequest) accept a CancelToken or pass one on, so a request keeps running after whatever wanted it has given up — a screen navigated away from, a disposed widget, a superseded search. Take a `CancelToken? cancelToken` and hand it to the request as `cancelToken:` (or hold one and cancel it in `dispose`); where nothing could ever cancel the call, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against how the function is used.
`_defaultReleaseMetadataFetcher` calls `Dio(…).getUri(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`. — tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/released_version.dart:165
`fetchCratesIoMetadata` calls `Dio(…).getUri(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`. — tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/post_release.dart:140
`_downloadSanitizedDartArtifactToFile` calls `Dio(…).download(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`. — tools/frb_internal/lib/src/misc/dart_sanitizer_tester/dart_sdk.dart:246
`_findGitHubReleaseAssetId` calls `Dio(…).get(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`. — tools/frb_internal/lib/src/misc/dart_sanitizer_tester/dart_sdk.dart:284

What to do

Thread a CancelToken through functions that make requests, so the work stops when its caller gives up.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X20 · Mistyped argument guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `NullPointerException` (Java, Kotlin, Scala), `ArgumentError.notNull` (Dart) or `ArgumentNullException` (F#'s `nullArg`) tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(p))` statements controlled by an `if`, whose condition is read for a test that is true of a NON-null `p` — an emptiness test that dereferences it (`p.Count == 0`, `!p.Any()`) or a BCL predicate documented true of the empty value (`string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)`). Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X22 · Contradicted release guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.

Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.

Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X25 · Inert configuration knob10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.

Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X26 · Unsynchronised callback handoff10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.

Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Code Health — Whether a `for` loop leaves the `RefCell` it is walking alone — safe Rust rejects a body that changes the collection its loop borrows at compile time, except through interior mutability: a `RefCell` borrowed in the loop's header stays borrowed until the loop ends, so a `borrow_mut()` of it inside the body panics with `already borrowed: BorrowMutError` and the remaining elements are never seen. Whether a `for` loop leaves the `dict`, `set` or `deque` it is walking alone — CPython's iterators over those check that the collection has not changed size since the loop began, so a body that removes from (or empties) the very collection the loop is walking makes the next step raise `RuntimeError: dictionary changed size during iteration` and the remaining items are never seen. Whether a `for … in` loop leaves the `List`, `Map` or `Set` it is walking alone — Dart's collection iterators check that the collection has not changed since the loop began, so a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is walking (or the map whose `keys`, `values` or `entries` it walks) makes the next step throw `ConcurrentModificationError` and the remaining elements are never seen.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X3 · Exception handling6.9 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

`catch (_)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. — frb_dart/lib/src/cli/build_web/executor.dart:199

What to do

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded)

Do you agree with this assessment?

X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X5 · Nullable reference types9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether Dart's sound null safety is on and is not undermined by null assertions — a package whose `environment: sdk:` lower bound is 2.12 or above is null safe, so `String` cannot hold null and `String?` must be checked before use, and each postfix `!` is a run-time `Null check operator used on a null value` the author has told the analyzer cannot happen.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 8 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (15%; ≈16% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 47 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

Dimension	WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria	Coverage
AC3 · Page structure	1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety	1.4.3, 2.4.7	Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcement	enforcement — no page criterion	Enforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 47 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.1.1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	73%	Strong	Solid.
Architecture	96%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	75%	Strong	Solid.
Readiness	60%	Adequate — gated by D13	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	61%	Adequate — gated by D28, D29, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Accessibility	17%	Critical — gated by AC3, AC6	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	78%	Strong	Solid.

Unscored — 3 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

P12 CI test-gate honesty — 1 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 11 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

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

Not included — 50 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 image/media element found in the parsed markup — AC1 not applicable here.
AC2 Forms & labels — No form control/button found in the parsed markup — AC2 not applicable here.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No ARIA usage found in the parsed markup — AC5 not applicable here.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's Dart imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's Kotlin imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; Rust with no dependency-injection crate has no container to hand one lifetime's instance to another — every value is owned by the code that builds it, and the borrow checker rejects a longer-lived value keeping a borrow of a shorter-lived one; this repository's Swift imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's TypeScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No class in this Kotlin code is a Spring, JSR-330 or CDI singleton bean. No function in this Python code is served by a threaded web framework (a Flask, Bottle or FastAPI route, a Django or Pyramid view), so no module is shared between request threads. No Swift request handler (a Vapor, Hummingbird, Kitura, Swifter or Perfect route handler, as a method or a registered closure) is declared, so no state is shared between request threads. Dart isolates share no mutable memory, so no two requests write one object at the same instant. Rust's compiler refuses unsynchronised shared mutation — a value shared across threads must be Sync — so the race this check looks for cannot be written. TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — no exported interface declares behaviour
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — docker build failed (exit 56) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~12589 lines of test source are present (.dart, .swift, .rs) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no .dart test runner
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 29 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 0 dependency(ies) and leaving 0 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.rs), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Aggregate boundaries — this Rust crate declares no domain aggregate (a struct with private state and its own command methods), so DM1's aggregate-boundary read has no population to be taken over
DM2 Strongly-typed ids — the crate defines newtype typed-ids but declares no domain aggregate that could carry an id — so DM2's adoption ratio has no population to be taken over
DM3 Integration-event coupling — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary — this Rust crate maps no type to a persistence framework (diesel/sea-orm/sqlx), so DM6's domain↔infrastructure fusion read has no population to be taken over
DM7 Repository granularity — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and this analysis resolves a call's owner only where the receiver's type is written down in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, which this analysis does not build from source alone for this language. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — Not assessed, and this one is on us: 3 command handler(s) or message consumer(s) were found here, but this check does not yet recognise persistence writes in this repository's language. Idempotency was neither confirmed nor ruled out — this is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the Dart, JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Rust source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — This check asks whether log calls keep a message's values apart from its text, which needs a logger that can carry them as fields. This repository's Dart was read, and it logs through none: package:logging, package:logger, talker and dart:developer take one finished message and no template arguments or fields (as log4net does in C#), so an interpolated message there loses nothing the API could have kept. Sentry's structured logs (`Sentry.logger`) would be judged.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.

Critical — 194 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 134 more in this group — see findings.md.

D28 · Secrets (history) · High secret · ×13

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

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D13 · Secret Scanning · Leaked secret · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

AC3 · Page structure · <html> without a lang · ×2

<html> without a lang frb_example/dart_build_rs/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1 — The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en").
<html> without a lang frb_example/dart_minimal/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1 — The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en").

AC3 · Page structure · Document without a <title> · ×2

Document without a <title> frb_example/dart_build_rs/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1 — A page with no <title> gives no name in the tab, history or screen-reader page list. Add a descriptive <title> in <head>.
Document without a <title> frb_example/dart_minimal/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1 — A page with no <title> gives no name in the tab, history or screen-reader page list. Add a descriptive <title> in <head>.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

Serious — 188 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×70

TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/acc.rs:25 — // TODO rm? codecov says this is unused — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/api_dart/spec_generator/function.rs:180 — // TODO: merge — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/api_dart/spec_generator/class/method.rs:111 — // TODO move — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/rust_opaque.rs:105 — // TODO move — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/mod.rs:109 — // TODO move — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/codec/sse/ty/rust_opaque.rs:66 — // TODO mv — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/codec/sse/ty/primitive_list.rs:29 — // TODO do not use naive loop — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/codec/sse/ty/primitive_list.rs:50 — // TODO do not use naive loop — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/codec/sse/ty/primitive.rs:96 — // TODO make it adapt to 32/64bit platform — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/base.rs:28 — // TODO duplicated with `WireDartCodecCstGeneratorContext` — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/dco/decoder/ty/boxed.rs:38 — // TODO merge with above — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/rust/spec_generator/extern_func.rs:69 — // TODO move this func to cst-specific — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/rust/spec_generator/extern_func.rs:131 — // TODO maybe move — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/lifetime_extractor.rs:43 — // TODO maybe move — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_rust/src/codec/sse.rs:113 — // TODO maybe move — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/rust/spec_generator/misc/mod.rs:260 — // TODO can compute hash for more things — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/delegate.rs:21 — // StringList,// TODO avoid this special case? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/delegate.rs:25 — // TimeList(MirTypeDelegateTime),// TODO avoid this special case? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/ir/mir/ty/delegate.rs:27 — // Uuids,// TODO avoid this special case? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/early_generator/ui_related.rs:136 — // TODO: Move to support library instead of inlining here — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/hir/flat/transformer/copy_trait_def_to_impl_transformer.rs:24 — // TODO correct? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/internal_config.rs:18 — // TODO rename - this is no longer an "input-namespace"-only pack — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/mod.rs:138 — // TODO rm — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment frb_utils/lib/src/serve_web/run_server.dart:41 — // TODO rm — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment REDACTED:817 — // TODO rm — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
+ 45 more in this group — see findings.md.

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking · ×40

Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99 — `_getPrecompiledArtifacts` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184 — `_tryDownloadArtifacts` is async and calls writeAsBytesSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19 — `build` is async and calls copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22 — `build` is async and calls createSync, copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20 — `build` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54 — `run` is async and calls createSync, readAsBytesSync, deleteSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99 — `_getPrecompiledArtifacts` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184 — `_tryDownloadArtifacts` is async and calls writeAsBytesSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19 — `build` is async and calls copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22 — `build` is async and calls createSync, copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20 — `build` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54 — `run` is async and calls createSync, readAsBytesSync, deleteSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99 — `_getPrecompiledArtifacts` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184 — `_tryDownloadArtifacts` is async and calls writeAsBytesSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19 — `build` is async and calls copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22 — `build` is async and calls createSync, copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20 — `build` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54 — `run` is async and calls createSync, readAsBytesSync, deleteSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99 — `_getPrecompiledArtifacts` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:184 — `_tryDownloadArtifacts` is async and calls writeAsBytesSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_cmake.dart:19 — `build` is async and calls copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_gradle.dart:22 — `build` is async and calls createSync, copySync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_pod.dart:20 — `build` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/precompile_binaries.dart:54 — `run` is async and calls createSync, readAsBytesSync, deleteSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking frb_example/integrate_third_party/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:99 — `_getPrecompiledArtifacts` is async and calls createSync — a blocking call inside async code stalls the isolate's event loop — every other event, on Flutter the next frame, waits for as long as it runs.
+ 15 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · HackComment · ×6

HackComment frb_codegen/src/library/commands/dart_build_runner.rs:55 — // Hack before https://github.com/dart-lang/native/issues/822 is fixed — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
HackComment frb_example/pure_dart/test/test_utils.dart:157 — /// Hack to make generated pseudo-manual tests be happy about async and sync — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
HackComment frb_rust/src/generalized_arc/moi_arc.rs:230 — // HACK and change value — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
HackComment frb_utils/lib/src/simple_build_utils.dart:63 — // Hacky workaround for internal FRB tooling only. — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
HackComment tools/frb_internal/lib/src/frb_example_pure_dart_generator/pde_generator.dart:116 — // hack (not a problem, since this script merely generates test code for bridge, — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
HackComment tools/frb_internal/lib/src/frb_example_pure_dart_generator/rust/entrypoint.dart:77 — // hack, otherwise `i32` is considered as Nom, and will ignore requests of using Moi codec — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×5

FileTooLong: vmware_windows/frb_vmware_windows_env.py tools/vmware_windows/frb_vmware_windows_env.py — FileTooLong — 1250 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 750 over it, 2.50× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py .claude/skills/frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py — FileTooLong — 1197 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 697 over it, 2.39× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 819 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 319 over it, 1.64× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: makefile_dart/quickstart_smoke.dart tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/quickstart_smoke.dart — FileTooLong — 600 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 100 over it, 1.20× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 567 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 67 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Function without a CancelToken · ×4

Function without a CancelToken: _defaultReleaseMetadataFetcher tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/released_version.dart:165 — `_defaultReleaseMetadataFetcher` calls `Dio(…).getUri(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`.
Function without a CancelToken: fetchCratesIoMetadata tools/frb_internal/lib/src/makefile_dart/post_release.dart:140 — `fetchCratesIoMetadata` calls `Dio(…).getUri(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`.
Function without a CancelToken: _downloadSanitizedDartArtifactToFile tools/frb_internal/lib/src/misc/dart_sanitizer_tester/dart_sdk.dart:246 — `_downloadSanitizedDartArtifactToFile` calls `Dio(…).download(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`.
Function without a CancelToken: _findGitHubReleaseAssetId tools/frb_internal/lib/src/misc/dart_sanitizer_tester/dart_sdk.dart:284 — `_findGitHubReleaseAssetId` calls `Dio(…).get(…)` but takes no CancelToken and hands the request none its caller can reach, so its caller cannot cancel the request once it has started. Take `CancelToken? cancelToken` and pass it on as `cancelToken: cancelToken` — or, in a widget's State or a notifier, hold one and cancel it in `dispose`.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair · ×3

Repeated repair: frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs:46 — frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days and 4 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 2 (its worst body is flutter_rust_bridge_codegen::library::codegen::config::internal_config_parser::rust_path_parser::sanity_check_rust_input_namespace_prefixes at line 46), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “Fix cross-platform unit test assumptions”; “Move discovered bug fixes out of test-only PR”; “Revert "Merge pull request #3348 from iWisp360/master"”; “fixes by clippy”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-20..2026-10-18, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-20 18:55:20 +08:00' --until='2026-10-18 18:55:20 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_parser.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_migrator.rs frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_migrator.rs:9 — frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_migrator.rs changed 5 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 2 (its worst body is flutter_rust_bridge_codegen::library::codegen::config::internal_config_parser::rust_path_migrator::migrate_rust_input_config at line 9), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “Revert "Merge pull request #3348 from iWisp360/master"”; “fixes by clippy”; “include template code to dynamically link libraries generated by frb on linux machines. Fixes #3320”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-20..2026-10-18, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-20 18:55:20 +08:00' --until='2026-10-18 18:55:20 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/config/internal_config_parser/rust_path_migrator.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: frb_codegen/src/library/integration/utils.rs frb_codegen/src/library/integration/utils.rs:12 — frb_codegen/src/library/integration/utils.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 6 (its worst body is flutter_rust_bridge_codegen::library::integration::utils::overlay_dir at line 12), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “Revert "Merge pull request #3348 from iWisp360/master"”; “fix issues with tests”; “include template code to dynamically link libraries generated by frb on linux machines. Fixes #3320”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-20..2026-10-18, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-20 18:55:20 +08:00' --until='2026-10-18 18:55:20 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- frb_codegen/src/library/integration/utils.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unsound) · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/cst/entrypoint.rs:22 — frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/cst/entrypoint.rs:22-30 | frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/rust/spec_generator/codec/dco/entrypoint.rs:21-29 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/dco/entrypoint.rs:19 — frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/dco/entrypoint.rs:19-27 | frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/rust/spec_generator/codec/cst/entrypoint.rs:31-39 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/sse/body.rs:23 — frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/dart/spec_generator/codec/sse/body.rs:23-31 | frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/generator/wire/rust/spec_generator/codec/sse/body.rs:19-27 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×2

Page without a main landmark frb_example/dart_build_rs/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>.
Page without a main landmark frb_example/dart_minimal/web/experiment_call_wasm_from_js.html:1 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FunctionParser · ×2

FunctionParser::parse_owner (cognitive 19) frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/real/owner.rs:21 — FunctionParser::parse_owner has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
FunctionParser::parse_function_inner (cognitive 17) frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/real/mod.rs:128 — FunctionParser::parse_function_inner has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (11 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unmaintained) · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

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

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) frb_codegen/src/main.rs:43 — frb_codegen/src/main.rs:43-48 | frb_codegen/src/main.rs:56-61 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/chrono_type.rs:7 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/chrono_type.rs:7-12 | frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/chrono_type.rs:42-47 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

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

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) frb_codegen/src/library/integration/creator.rs:129 — frb_codegen/src/library/integration/creator.rs:129-138 | frb_codegen/src/library/integration/creator.rs:142-151 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:136 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:136-145 | frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:136-145 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` and `frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 55 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard · ×1

Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard website/src/css/custom.css:46 — `.my-simple-spin` moves (`animation: my-simple-spin-keyframes 1.2s linear infinite`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce.

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

Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no accessibility linting at author time and no automated accessibility check in tests or CI. Add your UI toolkit's own accessibility assertion to the test suite (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in the pipeline. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 10 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

D17 · Explicit Debt · XxxComment · ×1

XxxComment frb_dart/lib/src/utils/single_complete_port.dart:5 — // NOTE XXX copy from: https://github.com/dart-archive/isolate/blob/master/lib/ports.dart

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · categorize_code_diff._rust_test_lines (cognitive 22) · ×1

categorize_code_diff._rust_test_lines (cognitive 22) .claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py:186 — categorize_code_diff._rust_test_lines has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (12 pts), loops 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: .claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py holds 2 of the 5 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 13 of the 20 points over it (65%), 3.3× the next-largest file (frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/real/owner.rs at 4). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · categorize_code_diff._mask_rust_comments_and_strings (cognitive 21) · ×1

categorize_code_diff._mask_rust_comments_and_strings (cognitive 21) .claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py:217 — categorize_code_diff._mask_rust_comments_and_strings has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (17 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: .claude/skills/frb-categorize-code-diff/categorize_code_diff.py holds 2 of the 5 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 13 of the 20 points over it (65%), 3.3× the next-largest file (frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/real/owner.rs at 4). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · codecov_analyzer._changed_new_lines_by_file (cognitive 16) · ×1

codecov_analyzer._changed_new_lines_by_file (cognitive 16) .claude/skills/frb-fix-codecov/codecov_analyzer.py:286 — codecov_analyzer._changed_new_lines_by_file has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate method name with different semantics/ownership implications. `BaseArc · ×1

Duplicate method name with different semantics/ownership implications. `BaseArc::into_inner` consumes the Arc to return the value (standard Arc behavior), whereas `RustOpaqueBase::into_inner` likely consumes the opaque handle to return the inner value, but the naming suggests identical behavior across different resource management models (Arc vs Opaque). — Rename `RustOpaqueBase.into_inner` to `RustOpaqueBase.into_value` or `RustOpaqueBase.unwrap` to distinguish it from the standard Arc consumption pattern, or ensure documentation clearly differentiates the ownership transfer. (signatures: BaseArc.into_inner(): T | RustOpaqueBase.into_inner(): T)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Ambiguous naming convention for async vs sync access. `RustAutoOpaqueBase` exposes both `read` and `blocking_read`. In async contexts, `read` often implies a non-blocking or future-returning operation, but here it returns a synchronous `RwLockReadGuard`. This is confusing for users who might expect `read` to be the primary async-safe method. Similarly for `write` vs `blocking_write`. · ×1

Ambiguous naming convention for async vs sync access. `RustAutoOpaqueBase` exposes both `read` and `blocking_read`. In async contexts, `read` often implies a non-blocking or future-returning operation, but here it returns a synchronous `RwLockReadGuard`. This is confusing for users who might expect `read` to be the primary async-safe method. Similarly for `write` vs `blocking_write`. — Rename `read`/`write` to `read_sync`/`write_sync` and `blocking_read`/`blocking_write` to `read`/`write` if the latter are the primary async-safe methods, or rename `blocking_*` to `blocking_*` and keep `read`/`write` as the standard sync methods if that is the intent. Given the 'AutoOpaque' context, it is likely `read`/`write` are intended for async contexts but return sync guards, which is misleading. Consider `read_guard`/`write_guard` for sync and `read_async`/`write_async` for async futures if applicable, or clarify that `read` is blocking. (signatures: RustAutoOpaqueBase.read(): RwLockReadGuard | RustAutoOpaqueBase.blocking_read(): RwLockReadGuard)

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D3 · God Classes · TooManyFields · ×1

TooManyFields: GenerateCommandArgsPrimary frb_codegen/src/binary/commands.rs:63 — TooManyFields — 39 stored fields. The bar is 30 stored fields; this is 9 over it, 1.30× the bar. This is width in DATA, not behaviour: every reader that takes the whole type couples to all of its fields, so a change to any one of them is a change every reader has to be checked against. To reduce it, group the fields that are read together by the same callers into a smaller type of their own, and have this one hold that type as a single member — each reader then names only the group it uses.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) .claude/skills/frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py:1305 — .claude/skills/frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py:1305-1317 | .claude/skills/frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py:1506-1518 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `.claude/skills/frb-dev-env/frb_dev_env.py:1305` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 8) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 8) frb_codegen/assets/integration_template/shared/app/lib/main.dart:13 — frb_codegen/assets/integration_template/shared/app/lib/main.dart:13-25 | frb_codegen/assets/integration_template/shared/plugin/example/lib/main.dart:12-24 | frb_example/flutter_package/example/lib/main.dart:12-24 | frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/lib/main.dart:12-24 | frb_example/flutter_via_create/lib/main.dart:13-25 | frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/lib/main.dart:13-25 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/lib/main.dart:139-151 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/lib/main.dart:139-151 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 8 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 8 times.

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

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:44 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:44-59 | frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:44-59 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` and `frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 55 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:28 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:28-41 | frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:28-41 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` and `frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 55 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/chrono_type.rs:2 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/chrono_type.rs:2-6 | frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/chrono_type.rs:17-21 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

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

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:61 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:61-67 | frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:61-67 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` and `frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 55 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:114 — frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:114-121 | frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs:114-121 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/pure_dart/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` and `frb_example/pure_dart_pde/rust/src/api/pseudo_manual/benchmark_api.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 55 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 12) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 12) frb_example/flutter_package/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6 — frb_example/flutter_package/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | frb_example/flutter_via_create/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_package/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_create/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-15 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/flutter_package/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift` and `frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 9) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 9) frb_example/flutter_package/example/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6 — frb_example/flutter_package/example/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/flutter_via_create/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/flutter_package/example/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift` and `frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/macos/Runner/AppDelegate.swift` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 13) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 13) frb_example/flutter_package/example/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5 — frb_example/flutter_package/example/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/flutter_via_create/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/gallery/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/integrate_third_party/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/rust_ui_counter/ui/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | frb_example/rust_ui_todo_list/ui/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_create_native_assets/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 | tools/frb_internal/assets/apple_scaffold/frb_example/flutter_via_integrate_native_assets/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift:5-14 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/flutter_package/example/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift` and `frb_example/flutter_package_native_assets/example/macos/Runner/MainFlutterWindow.swift` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) frb_example/gallery/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6 — frb_example/gallery/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/integrate_third_party/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/rust_ui_counter/ui/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 | frb_example/rust_ui_todo_list/ui/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift:6-12 — before extracting anything, compare `frb_example/integrate_third_party/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift` and `frb_example/rust_ui_counter/ui/ios/Runner/AppDelegate.swift` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: flutter_rust_bridge (pub) — flutter_rust_bridge (pub): abstractness 0.19, instability 0.00, distance 0.81 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×1

Low cohesion: RustOpaqueBase (LCOM4 5) frb_rust/src/rust_opaque/mod.rs:11 — RustOpaqueBase's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.

P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Coverage collected but not gated · ×1

Coverage collected but not gated — CI collects a coverage report but no step enforces a minimum — coverage could halve and CI stays green. Add a step that fails the build when coverage drops below a floor (your coverage tool's minimum-threshold flag, or a coverage-gate action) so the number guards something. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: this repository's CI files AND its coverage configuration — the well-known coverage and test-runner config files, read at the repository root and inside workspace package directories two levels down, so a floor declared beside the tests rather than in the pipeline is credited — matched against the threshold settings this check knows by name. A floor set in your coverage service's web UI rather than in a committed file, or under a setting whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

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

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) frb_dart/lib/src/cli/build_web/executor.dart:199 — `catch (_)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.

Minor — 73 finding(s)

M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×40

README/code drift tools/tart_macos/README.md:124 — tools/tart_macos/README.md documents the environment variable `PROXY_PORT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/quickstart.md:110 — website/docs/quickstart.md links to `guides/miscellaneous/pure-dart`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/pure-dart` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/quickstart.md:126 — website/docs/quickstart.md links to `manual/integrate/overview`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/quickstart.md:139 — website/docs/quickstart.md links to `guides/miscellaneous/directory`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/directory` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/quickstart.md:209 — website/docs/quickstart.md links to `demo`, but `website/docs/demo` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/manual/troubleshooting.md:149 — website/docs/manual/troubleshooting.md links to `./miscellaneous/wasm-limitations`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/wasm-limitations` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md:129 — website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md links to `submodules/cst-codec`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/cst-codec` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md:129 — website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md links to `submodules/dco-codec`, but `website/docs/guides/contributing/submodules/dco-codec` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md:140 — website/docs/guides/contributing/overview.md links to `../miscellaneous/codec`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/codec` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/functions/eq-hash.md:26 — website/docs/guides/functions/eq-hash.md links to `../misc-features/dart-code`, but `website/docs/guides/misc-features/dart-code` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/functions/methods.md:7 — website/docs/guides/functions/methods.md links to `../third-party/manual/external-types`, but `website/docs/guides/third-party/manual/external-types` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/how-to/build-release.md:14 — website/docs/guides/how-to/build-release.md links to `../../manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/how-to/cross-origin.md:9 — website/docs/guides/how-to/cross-origin.md links to `../../manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/how-to/debug.md:25 — website/docs/guides/how-to/debug.md links to `./logging`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/logging` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/how-to/regression.md:3 — website/docs/guides/how-to/regression.md links to `../miscellaneous/safety`, but `website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/safety` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/how-to/report-error.md:11 — website/docs/guides/how-to/report-error.md links to `stack-trace`, but `website/docs/guides/how-to/stack-trace` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/how-to/rust-compilation.md:7 — website/docs/guides/how-to/rust-compilation.md links to `../../manual/integrate/overview`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/misc-features/ignoring.md:7 — website/docs/guides/misc-features/ignoring.md links to `../functions/ignoring`, but `website/docs/guides/functions/ignoring` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/codec.md:49 — website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/codec.md links to `../performance/overview`, but `website/docs/guides/performance/overview` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/deployment.md:6 — website/docs/guides/miscellaneous/deployment.md links to `../../manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin`, but `website/docs/manual/miscellaneous/web-cross-origin` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:30 — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/migrate-cargokit-to-native-assets` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:31 — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `template`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/template` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:32 — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `existing`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/existing` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:33 — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `library`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/library` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md:34 — website/docs/manual/integrate/01-overview.md links to `dart-workspace`, but `website/docs/manual/integrate/dart-workspace` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
+ 15 more in this group — see findings.md.

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×11

Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart:219 — `!env.ndkIsInstalled() && environment.javaHome != null` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:172 — `e.osError?.errorCode == 54 || e.osError?.errorCode == 10054` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/target.dart:114 — `element.darwinPlatform == platformName && element.darwinArch == darwinAarch` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/target.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/target.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/target.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/target.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:26 — `finalFileName.endsWith('.dll') || finalFileName.endsWith('.dll.lib') || finalFileName.endsWith('.pdb') || finalFileName.endsWith('.so') || f…` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart:32 — `finalFileName.endsWith('.lib') || finalFileName.endsWith('.a')` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/artifacts_provider.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/rustup.dart:81 — `installedName == requestedToolchain || installedName.startsWith('$requestedToolchain-')` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/rustup.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/rustup.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/rustup.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/rustup.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/logging.dart:39 — `line.isNotEmpty || lines.length == 1 || line != lines.last` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/logging.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/logging.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/logging.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/logging.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_tool.dart:32 — `options.verboseLogging || Platform.environment['CARGOKIT_VERBOSE'] == '1'` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_tool.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_tool.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_tool.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/build_tool.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/util.dart:157 — `p.contains('homebrew') && File(path.join(p, 'rustc')).existsSync()` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/util.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/util.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/util.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/util.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_dart/lib/src/dart_opaque/_common.dart:11 — `raw is double && raw.isFinite && raw == raw.truncateToDouble()` appears character-identically in 3 files — frb_dart/lib/src/dart_opaque/_common.dart, frb_dart/lib/src/manual_impl/_web.dart, frb_dart/lib/src/platform_utils/_web.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart:163 — `target.android == null && environment.glibcVersion != null` appears character-identically in 7 files — frb_example/flutter_package/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_create/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart, frb_example/flutter_via_integrate/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart, frb_example/gallery/rust_builder/cargokit/build_tool/lib/src/builder.dart. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×10

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

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

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 9 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 7.8/10. The most over is `frb_codegen` (42047 LoC, 353 module-visible types across 92 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

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

P10 · Library API & versioning · Large public API surface · ×1

Large public API surface — 4556/5024 types (91%) declared in the published library are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — keep implementation types off the surface and expose only the intended API.

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 13/45 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`, `frb_example/dart_build_rs`, `frb_example/dart_minimal`, `frb_example/deliberate_bad`, `frb_example/deliberate_bad/rust` and 27 more.

P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No release approval gate · ×1

No release approval gate — The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all functions that make a request accept a CancelToken · ×1

Not all functions that make a request accept a CancelToken — Only 0/4 functions that make a cancellable request (Dio, AbortableRequest) accept a CancelToken or pass one on, so a request keeps running after whatever wanted it has given up — a screen navigated away from, a disposed widget, a superseded search. Take a `CancelToken? cancelToken` and hand it to the request as `cancelToken:` (or hold one and cancel it in `dispose`); where nothing could ever cancel the call, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against how the function is used.

X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default on Err · ×1

Silent fallback default on Err frb_codegen/src/library/codegen/parser/mir/parser/function/auto_accessor/mod.rs:70 — `parse_auto_accessors_of_struct` turns every `Err` into `Ok(vec![])` — a failure becomes a plausible value and a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the error or propagate it with `?`. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the arm or in the doc comment, and the row stops firing.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-1d75e6be94ae43f0a034c71f0179ea9f/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	4	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-1d75e6be94ae43f0a034c71f0179ea9f/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	1	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	182	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	10	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	10	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a16970-6bb9-7f86-b27e-edcc9f693410 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 73% · Strong ·

At a glance — Architecture · 96% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 75% · Strong ·

At a glance — Readiness · 60% · Adequate · gated by D13 ·

At a glance — Security · 61% · Adequate · gated by D28, D29, D36 ·

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 100% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Accessibility · 17% · Critical · gated by AC3, AC6 ·

At a glance — Performance · 78% · Strong ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts