Public report of ivangfr/axon-springboot-websocket, published 22 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of
findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known
vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive reportMeasured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey →
Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 22 October 2026, 07:59 UTC · Survey ID cd_9097f5fec72a444b98129aaef52a7297
ivangfr/axon-springboot-websocket
Measured 22 October 2026, 07:52 UTC, at code version a46df16
CAI scoreAdequate
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
No change since the last survey
The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.
A small codebase: 3,141 lines of product code in 4 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.1 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 28
Findings by how serious they are
21 critical59 serious39 minor
18 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
22 October 2026, 07:52 UTC
A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number
together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee
the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that
implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.
The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸
71of 74 dimensions measured by tools. The other 3 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
109of 119 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 10 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
74dimensions across 8 lenses, read from 3,141 lines of product code in 4 projects.
ivangfr/axon-springboot-websocket scores 44 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while six of its eight lenses score higher still: Event Sourcing at 100, Architecture at 96, Security and Compliance at 87 and Maturity at 72, all rated Exemplary, and Code Health at 76 and Domain Modelling at 57, both rated Adequate. Watchdog judged it as a template, sample or demo, meant to be read or copied, so the dimensions about building, releasing and running a product don't apply, and its lenses are rated against a lower bar. The score itself is worked out as for any repository.
The score is lower than those six because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 28 and is rated Weak. Its CI/CD gates dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality and to add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 44 to about 56.
21 findings are critical: 18 in Forms & labels, two in Test Quality and one in Secrets (history).
Watchdog couldn't measure 16 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 3,141 lines, which would take an estimated 0.1 person-years, around €5,800, to rebuild.
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 forThe 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.
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto (no migration path) restaurant-service/src/main/resources/application.properties
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.
Rebuild cost: about €5,800 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€1,900 to €9,600, for 32 to 101 hours of work, about 0.1 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem
High, 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 44. 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
Small: 3,141 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.
1
Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java, FoodOrderingServiceApplicationTests.java.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Low effort · Test Quality
2
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
Raises the score by about 7 points · Medium effort · CI/CD gates
3
Resolve the 23 No direct assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java (12), RestaurantAggregateTest.java (10), RestaurantServiceApplicationTests.java.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Test Quality
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 €5,800 to build again, about 0.1 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 28 (Weak). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Production Readiness grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Production Readiness actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 5 points for low effort, because it clears the 2 Test Quality findings. 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.
56 modules, with 47 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.
The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 16 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.
customerservice.aggregate uses axoneventcommons.customer, so a change to axoneventcommons.customer can break customerservice.aggregate, while a change to customerservice.aggregate can't break axoneventcommons.customer.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.aggregate uses customerservice.command, so a change to customerservice.command can break customerservice.aggregate, while a change to customerservice.aggregate can't break customerservice.command.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.repository uses axoneventcommons.customer, so a change to axoneventcommons.customer can break customerservice.repository, while a change to customerservice.repository can't break axoneventcommons.customer.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.repository uses axoneventcommons.order, so a change to axoneventcommons.order can break customerservice.repository, while a change to customerservice.repository can't break axoneventcommons.order.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.repository uses customerservice.model, so a change to customerservice.model can break customerservice.repository, while a change to customerservice.repository can't break customerservice.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.repository uses customerservice.query, so a change to customerservice.query can break customerservice.repository, while a change to customerservice.repository can't break customerservice.query.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.rest.dto uses customerservice.model, so a change to customerservice.model can break customerservice.rest.dto, while a change to customerservice.rest.dto can't break customerservice.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.rest.dto uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.websocket uses axoneventcommons.customer, so a change to axoneventcommons.customer can break customerservice.websocket, while a change to customerservice.websocket can't break axoneventcommons.customer.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.websocket uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.websocket uses axoneventcommons.order, so a change to axoneventcommons.order can break customerservice.websocket, while a change to customerservice.websocket can't break axoneventcommons.order.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.websocket uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.customer.repository uses axoneventcommons.customer, so a change to axoneventcommons.customer can break foodorderingservice.customer.repository, while a change to foodorderingservice.customer.repository can't break axoneventcommons.customer.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.customer.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto uses foodorderingservice.customer.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.customer.model can break foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto, while a change to foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto can't break foodorderingservice.customer.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.command uses foodorderingservice.order.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.model can break foodorderingservice.order.command, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.command can't break foodorderingservice.order.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.command uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.repository uses axoneventcommons.order, so a change to axoneventcommons.order can break foodorderingservice.order.repository, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.repository can't break axoneventcommons.order.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.repository uses foodorderingservice.order.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.model can break foodorderingservice.order.repository, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.repository can't break foodorderingservice.order.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.repository uses foodorderingservice.order.query, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.query can break foodorderingservice.order.repository, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.repository can't break foodorderingservice.order.query.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto uses foodorderingservice.order.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.model can break foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto can't break foodorderingservice.order.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.websocket uses axoneventcommons.customer, so a change to axoneventcommons.customer can break foodorderingservice.order.websocket, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.websocket can't break axoneventcommons.customer.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.websocket uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.websocket uses axoneventcommons.order, so a change to axoneventcommons.order can break foodorderingservice.order.websocket, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.websocket can't break axoneventcommons.order.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.websocket uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.websocket uses axoneventcommons.restaurant, so a change to axoneventcommons.restaurant can break foodorderingservice.order.websocket, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.websocket can't break axoneventcommons.restaurant.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.websocket uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository uses axoneventcommons.restaurant, so a change to axoneventcommons.restaurant can break foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository, while a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository can't break axoneventcommons.restaurant.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto uses foodorderingservice.restaurant.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.model can break foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto, while a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto can't break foodorderingservice.restaurant.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.aggregate uses axoneventcommons.restaurant, so a change to axoneventcommons.restaurant can break restaurantservice.aggregate, while a change to restaurantservice.aggregate can't break axoneventcommons.restaurant.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.aggregate uses restaurantservice.command, so a change to restaurantservice.command can break restaurantservice.aggregate, while a change to restaurantservice.aggregate can't break restaurantservice.command.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.repository uses axoneventcommons.order, so a change to axoneventcommons.order can break restaurantservice.repository, while a change to restaurantservice.repository can't break axoneventcommons.order.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.repository uses axoneventcommons.restaurant, so a change to axoneventcommons.restaurant can break restaurantservice.repository, while a change to restaurantservice.repository can't break axoneventcommons.restaurant.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.repository uses restaurantservice.model, so a change to restaurantservice.model can break restaurantservice.repository, while a change to restaurantservice.repository can't break restaurantservice.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.repository uses restaurantservice.query, so a change to restaurantservice.query can break restaurantservice.repository, while a change to restaurantservice.repository can't break restaurantservice.query.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.rest.dto uses restaurantservice.model, so a change to restaurantservice.model can break restaurantservice.rest.dto, while a change to restaurantservice.rest.dto can't break restaurantservice.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.rest.dto uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.websocket uses axoneventcommons.restaurant, so a change to axoneventcommons.restaurant can break restaurantservice.websocket, while a change to restaurantservice.websocket can't break axoneventcommons.restaurant.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.websocket uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
customerservice.rest uses customerservice.rest.dto, so a change to customerservice.rest.dto can break customerservice.rest, while a change to customerservice.rest can't break customerservice.rest.dto.
Position
Below the diagonal: customerservice.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.customer.service uses foodorderingservice.customer.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.customer.model can break foodorderingservice.customer.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.customer.service can't break foodorderingservice.customer.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.customer.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.customer.service uses foodorderingservice.customer.repository, so a change to foodorderingservice.customer.repository can break foodorderingservice.customer.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.customer.service can't break foodorderingservice.customer.repository.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.customer.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.aggregate uses axoneventcommons.order, so a change to axoneventcommons.order can break foodorderingservice.order.aggregate, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.aggregate can't break axoneventcommons.order.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.aggregate uses foodorderingservice.order.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.model can break foodorderingservice.order.aggregate, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.aggregate can't break foodorderingservice.order.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.aggregate uses foodorderingservice.order.command, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.command can break foodorderingservice.order.aggregate, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.aggregate can't break foodorderingservice.order.command.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.aggregate uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.restaurant.service uses foodorderingservice.restaurant.model, so a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.model can break foodorderingservice.restaurant.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.service can't break foodorderingservice.restaurant.model.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.restaurant.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.restaurant.service uses foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository, so a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository can break foodorderingservice.restaurant.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.service can't break foodorderingservice.restaurant.repository.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.restaurant.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
restaurantservice.rest uses restaurantservice.rest.dto, so a change to restaurantservice.rest.dto can break restaurantservice.rest, while a change to restaurantservice.rest can't break restaurantservice.rest.dto.
Position
Below the diagonal: restaurantservice.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.customer.rest uses foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto, so a change to foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto can break foodorderingservice.customer.rest, while a change to foodorderingservice.customer.rest can't break foodorderingservice.customer.rest.dto.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.customer.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.customer.rest uses foodorderingservice.customer.service, so a change to foodorderingservice.customer.service can break foodorderingservice.customer.rest, while a change to foodorderingservice.customer.rest can't break foodorderingservice.customer.service.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.customer.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.service uses foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto can break foodorderingservice.order.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.service can't break foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.service uses foodorderingservice.customer.service, so a change to foodorderingservice.customer.service can break foodorderingservice.order.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.service can't break foodorderingservice.customer.service.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.service uses foodorderingservice.restaurant.service, so a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.service can break foodorderingservice.order.service, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.service can't break foodorderingservice.restaurant.service.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest uses foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto, so a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto can break foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest, while a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest can't break foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest.dto.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest uses foodorderingservice.restaurant.service, so a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.service can break foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest, while a change to foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest can't break foodorderingservice.restaurant.service.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.restaurant.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.rest uses foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto can break foodorderingservice.order.rest, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.rest can't break foodorderingservice.order.rest.dto.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
foodorderingservice.order.rest uses foodorderingservice.order.service, so a change to foodorderingservice.order.service can break foodorderingservice.order.rest, while a change to foodorderingservice.order.rest can't break foodorderingservice.order.service.
Position
Below the diagonal: foodorderingservice.order.rest uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
At a glance — Code Health · 76% · Adequate · gated by X5 ·
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
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures
2
High / Critical
Roadmap
Establish a CI workflow to build and test on every push to ensure immediate feedback on code changes. Prioritize strengthening test coverage by adding direct assertions to the identified controller, aggregate, and service tests, starting with the highest-impact files. Finally, improve accessibility by ensuring all form controls have programmatic labels and buttons have descriptive text.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java, FoodOrderingServiceApplicationTests.java.
Resolve the 23 No direct assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java (12), RestaurantAggregateTest.java (10), RestaurantServiceApplicationTests.java.
Resolve the 19 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java (8), CustomerAggregateTest.java (4), OrderControllerWebMvcTest.java (4).
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.
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.
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 — 21
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 — 59
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 — 39
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 18
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. 71 of 74 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 74 dimensions across the health lenses
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, 109 of 119 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
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.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.java) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report`) 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 (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report`) 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 (.java) and this repository declares a JVM test suite (repository root, Maven), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. 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 — 5 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 3 dependency(ies) and leaving 52 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.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is an ADMISSION gap, not an environment fault: no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here. D22 DOES collect the public API of every language in this tree, and admits a project only when its manifest makes that ecosystem's publication act in a form the marker recognises — so what is missing is not a collector but an admission rule for the publication act this repository makes, if it makes one. The remedy is a better discriminator for that marker — not a collector, and no change to the scan image can close it. The marker's rules are measured to refuse applications, so one refused repository is the rule working as calibrated; several are the evidence that it is too strict. For npm the surface is what a published package.json's entry points (exports, main, module, types) export, followed through the source; an entry that names build output the tree does not commit (dist/, build/) is not followed back to source, because only a tsconfig outDir/rootDir pair states that mapping and a bundler's input lives in executable configuration this engine does not evaluate.
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.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — 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. Osv: osv-scanner exited 127 with no findings — dependency CVEs were not measured. 'osv-scanner' exited 127 and produced no findings, and that exit code has no documented repo-side meaning — so this run measured nothing, and nothing here is a statement about the repository.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Osv: osv-scanner exited 127 with no findings — dependency CVEs were not measured. 'osv-scanner' exited 127 and produced no findings, and that exit code has no documented repo-side meaning — so this run measured nothing, and nothing here is a statement about the 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 ToolchainServer (customer-service). the service did not build — `mvn -B -q -DskipTests compile` exited -1: Tool stalled (no output) after 00:02:00.0052376.; runtime evidence skipped (launch chosen because customer-service/pom.xml declares spring-boot-starter-web and the Spring Boot Maven plugin).
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 Java 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.
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.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
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").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling: Boundary leakage is detected from type references across detected contexts — leaks that flow through primitives, serialization or shared infrastructure may not surface as a typed reference.
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").
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.
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 Dockerfile (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.
AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
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.
DM4 Rich vs anemic 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.
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
The LLM boundary
LLM-set scores this run (3): D19, D21, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.
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.
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.
0 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D3 · God Classes10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").
Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.
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.
+ 10 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 RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java (2), CustomerResponse.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with OrderResponse.java, RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with CustomerRepositoryProjector.java, RestaurantResponse.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Duplication in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. 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 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.
4 production modules (Maven), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 1 module(s) off the main sequence.
Off the main sequence: axon-event-commons
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
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.
90 test methods: 90 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D10 · Test Quality6.2 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.
Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.
0 skipped, 44 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 90 tests (1 harness-style project(s) excluded from the assertion penalty).
No assertions (empty test): contextLoads · ×2customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java:12
No assertions: testAddCustomer · ×19customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/aggregate/CustomerAggregateTest.java:25
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurant · ×23restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:34
What to do
Resolve the 23 No direct assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java (12), RestaurantAggregateTest.java (10), RestaurantServiceApplicationTests.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (23 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java, FoodOrderingServiceApplicationTests.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 19 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java (8), CustomerAggregateTest.java (4), OrderControllerWebMvcTest.java (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (19 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Test Quality in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
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.
What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").
Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.
1 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantController.java. Counted over 9 of the 118 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Small-team knowledge concentration
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
0 deducted task-comment markers across 3141 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. 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.
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.
The repository's root README is a well-written overview of axon-springboot-websocket: it states what the project is (a food-ordering app built with Axon CQRS and Event Sourcing), lists the three Spring Boot services, links to Axon docs, and describes the Proof-of-Concepts and articles on ivangfr.github.io. It also mentions prerequisites, running applications via Maven/Docker, URLs, a demo, useful commands, shutdown, tests, cleanup, formatting, support, license, and references. The document is complete for an overview but does not yet show installation or usage examples (the clip occurs before the Prerequisites section), so those are not flagged.
What to do
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 7.0/10. — The repository's root README is a well-written overview of axon-springboot-websocket: it states what the project is (a food-ordering app built with Axon CQRS and Event Sourcing), lists the three Spring Boot services, links to Axon docs, and describes the Proof-of-Concepts and articles on ivangfr.github.io. It also mentions prerequisites, running applications via Maven/Docker, URLs, a demo, useful commands, shutdown, tests, cleanup, formatting, support, license, and references. The document is complete for an overview but does not yet show installation or usage examples (the clip occurs before the Prerequisites section), so those are not flagged.
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.
What it measures: Whether domain types (IDs, enums, value objects) leak across bounded-context boundaries.
Method: Cross-context domain-type leakage via Roslyn structural classification (strongly-typed IDs / value objects) over every public surface. Exhaustive, deterministic, type-level aggregate-boundary check.
Coverage: Bounded contexts derived from NAMESPACE prefix (or graph-inferred where available); cross-boundary domain-type leakage then checked exhaustively over every public member of every type.
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.
1 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.
REDACTED
REDACTED
What to do
Resolve the 1 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 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.
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).
semgrep found no security issues. semgrep hit a parse error in 1 file(s) — `mvnw` (line 86, line 124, line 134, …) — 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.
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.
1 of 9 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/aggregate/OrderAggregate.java. Counted over 9 of the 118 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Resolve the 1 Orphaned files with no living knowledge finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with OrderAggregate.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. 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.
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.
0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 2 platform declaration(s) and 10 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.
AC2 · Forms & labels2.8 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.
Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id. (×9) — customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:45, customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:56, customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:66, …
This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. (×9) — customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:48, customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:59, customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:69, …
What to do
Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
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.
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.
This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade. (×7) — customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:48, food-ordering-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:86, food-ordering-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:112, …
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.
Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.
Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.
Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.
No accessibility enforcement found — no accessibility linting at author time and no automated accessibility check in tests or CI. Add your UI toolkit's own accessibility assertion to the test suite (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in the pipeline. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
What to do
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain your project already uses: assert accessibility in your UI test suite with your toolkit's own matcher (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in CI so a regression blocks the merge.
Other · Architecture — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.
Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.
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.
Other · Architecture — Whether singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.
Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.
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.
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.
Other · Architecture — Whether interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').
Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates reference each other by identity (id) rather than by direct object reference — the core DDD consistency-boundary rule.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): aggregate roots identified by convention; each aggregate field checked for direct references to other aggregates versus id-only. Deterministic, DDD-native.
Coverage: Population: aggregate roots identified by AggregateRoot/IAggregateRoot base/interface NAME convention; reference-by-identity then checked exhaustively within that set — a root not using those names is invisible.
Do you agree with this assessment?
DM10 · One transaction, one aggregate10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether a single operation mutates more than one aggregate root. An aggregate is a consistency boundary, so saving two together fuses them into one — the second's invariants come to depend on the first's transaction, and the pair can no longer be separated. Reads of other aggregates are not counted.
Method: Neutral body surface (DDD-gated): every method body scanned for repository WRITE calls (Add/Update/Save/Remove/Delete/Insert/Store and their async forms), keyed on the ARGUMENT type rather than the repository type — three `IRepository<T>` writes collapse to one repository but are three distinct aggregates. Reads (Get/Find/Load/Query) are excluded, so loading another aggregate for context never counts. Score is offending methods over methods that write at all. Deterministic.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether an aggregate can be constructed in a state its own rules forbid — a public constructor that takes a raw primitive, stores it, and validates nothing, with no factory beside it. A constructor taking only value objects is not counted: each parameter has already validated itself.
Method: Neutral surface (DDD-gated): each non-abstract entity/aggregate checked for a PUBLIC constructor taking at least one RAW PRIMITIVE parameter whose body contains no guard token (throw / Guard. / Ensure. / ArgumentException / CheckRule), on a type that also offers no static Create/Of/From/New factory. A constructor taking only value objects is never charged -- measured: 64 of 87 unguarded public constructors on the C# corpus take value objects only, so ignoring parameter types would be 73% false positives. One finding per entity. Deterministic.
Do you agree with this assessment?
DM4 · Rich vs anemic model3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates/entities carry the behaviour that protects their invariants, rather than being data bags driven by external services.
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.
`Dish` is an aggregate/entity with 4 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Dish.java:20
`Order` is an aggregate/entity with 8 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Order.java:25
`Restaurant` is an aggregate/entity with 4 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Restaurant.java:22
`Customer` is an aggregate/entity with 4 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Customer.java:21
`Order` is an aggregate/entity with 7 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Order.java:25
What to do
Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether entities protect their state — private/init-only setters, and collections handed out as read-only views rather than the mutable backing collection — instead of exposing writable state that bypasses invariants. Softened when a rehydration framework (Marten/EF) is present.
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.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether repositories are per aggregate root (not per child entity) and keep the persistence query handle behind the contract, so the root's invariants can't be bypassed.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): repository abstraction detection; repositories over non-aggregate-root entities flagged, and (C#/VB) repository INTERFACES whose members return a live persistence query handle (IQueryable/DbSet/IMongoQueryable) — implementations and specification evaluators are out of population by design, since composing a query internally is what an implementation is for. Deterministic, DDD-native.
Coverage: Population: repositories + aggregate roots by NAME convention; per-root repository rule checked within the set.
`OrderRepository` is a repository over `Order`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Order` through its owning aggregate instead. (×2) — restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/OrderRepository.java:9, customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/OrderRepository.java:9
`RestaurantRepository` is a repository over `Restaurant`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Restaurant` through its owning aggregate instead. — restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepository.java:8
`CustomerRepository` is a repository over `Customer`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Customer` through its owning aggregate instead. — customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepository.java:8
What to do
Define repositories per aggregate root and keep the query handle inside them; reach child entities through their root so invariants can't be bypassed.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether clusters of primitives that travel together (a missing value object) are extracted — a low-weight suggestion, LLM-confirmed when configured.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): primitive parameter clusters recurring three or more times across signatures extracted, then confirmed by language model when configured. Advisory, low-weight.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether one domain rule is decided — or one measurement produced — in more than one place, rather than living on the type that owns it.
Method: Neutral body surface plus Roslyn (DDD-gated), two arms. DECISION (Roslyn only): a predicate over a domain type's members judged in two or more types, where none of those decisions live on the owning type — operands of comparisons and relational property patterns only, so a member merely passed as an argument is not judged. DERIVATION: a plain all-numeric carrier of ≥2 members, with no base type and exactly one constructor, CONSTRUCTED as the result of a method (returned or assigned, never inline as an argument) in two or more types other than its own — the same measurement produced twice, which centralising the judgement does not fix. DERIVATION runs on every language whose frontend declares the produced-or-passed fact per construction (Roslyn and the Java sidecar today); a target with only the derivation arm carries an engine gap naming the decision arm as not assessed, and a frontend that declares nothing keeps the dimension not measured rather than clean. Single-member rules, test code and generated code are out of population for both. Advisory.
Other · Event Sourcing — Whether Apply/When folds reconstruct state purely from the event (no DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random or IO) so replay is reproducible.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan (event-sourcing gated): Apply/When folds checked for forbidden tokens (DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random, IO), stripped of comments/strings. Deterministic, hard fact per fold.
Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords, in this repository's Java: methods that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant or do nothing, dead `if (false)` branches, and skeleton classes most of whose methods are holes.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.
A test is skipped/ignored — coverage that looks present but never runs. Re-enable it or delete it so the green run means something. (×3) — customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java:7, food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/FoodOrderingServiceApplicationTests.java:7, restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/RestaurantServiceApplicationTests.java:7
What to do
Clear the softer debt: re-enable or delete @Disabled/@Ignore tests, decide whether each empty method or UnsupportedOperationException is deliberate (and say so in a comment), and replace @SuppressWarnings("all") with targeted, justified suppressions.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
What to do
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 4 of 4 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
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.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.
README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists — searched for: `dockerfile`, `docker-compose`, `compose.yaml`, `compose.yml`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest and configuration files (package.json and other *.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.sln/*.slnx, *.yml, *.toml, *.config, tool configs such as eslint.config.js, Dockerfile); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:54
What to do
Reconcile the README with reality: README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.
Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
What to do
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P2 · Observability7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.
Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-java or Micrometer) and a health-check endpoint (Spring Boot Actuator's /actuator/health, or a /health route) for operability.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).
Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
Run what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are traceable — a maintained changelog and explicit version stamping.
Method: Filesystem scan: changelog file presence and version tags in csproj or git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
What to do
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P8 · Schema migrations3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether database schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than being auto-created from the model at startup.
Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage; off .NET, a file scan of dependency manifests, migration histories (Flyway, Liquibase, Alembic, Django, Rails, Prisma, TypeORM, Knex/Sequelize, golang-migrate, goose, Laravel, Doctrine, Diesel/sqlx) and schema auto-create in production source or config. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Hibernate ddl-auto builds the schema from the model at startup and keeps no migration history, so there is no reviewed, repeatable upgrade path for an existing production database — a renamed column is dropped and re-added rather than migrated. Adopt Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate`, so every schema change is a versioned file applied the same way in every environment. (×2) — customer-service/src/main/resources/application.properties:7, restaurant-service/src/main/resources/application.properties:7
What to do
Replace Hibernate ddl-auto with Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate` so the production schema can evolve safely and reproducibly.
Other · Security — Only what this repository's own non-C# files could be read for was assessed — markup this repository SHIPS is scored for third-party script integrity whether or not the repository serves it itself, since a page handed to a consumer runs in that consumer’s origin. Nothing else in this dimension was assessed: the transport, cookie, input-validation and crypto controls are read from a source model that was not loaded for this repository’s language, so their absence here is not a finding about this repository.
Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.
`https://cdn.tailwindcss.com` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. The URL also names no version, so it resolves to whatever that origin serves at fetch time — the executed bytes can change with nobody touching this repository. 18 such include(s) across the repository's markup. — customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:7
What to do
Pin third-party scripts and verify them: name an exact version in the URL and add an `integrity="sha384-…"` hash alongside `crossorigin="anonymous"` (both are required — an integrity hash on a cross-origin script without `crossorigin` is not evaluated, it blocks the script). Where the vendor ships a continuously-updated loader and publishes no stable hash (tag managers, analytics, chat widgets), Subresource Integrity is not available: constrain it instead with a `Content-Security-Policy` that names the exact origins allowed to execute, and drop the script from the pages that do not need it. Where the page is shipped inside a package that others host, prefer vendoring the asset and serving it from the app’s own origin, so no consumer inherits a third-party dependency they did not choose.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 an enhanced `for` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is iterating invalidates the fail-fast iterator it is holding, so the next `next()` throws `ConcurrentModificationException` 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.
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.
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.
Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. 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 `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.
Other · Code Health — Whether Java packages are null-marked and not undermined by heavy nullness suppression — a package under `@NullMarked` (or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, or a NullAway/Checker Framework configuration naming it) makes an unannotated reference exclude null, and `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")`, `("nullness")`, `("null")` and `castToNonNull(…)` are what silence it.
Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.
0/53 of this repository's Java package directories are under a non-null default: a `package-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked` (JSpecify) or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, `@DefaultQualifier(NonNull.class)`; a `module-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked`; every type in it `@NullMarked`; or a build that runs NullAway with the package in `AnnotatedPackages`, or the Checker Framework's `NullnessChecker`. Elsewhere every reference admits null and no checker warns on the dereference that throws a `NullPointerException`.
What to do
Declare the default where Java declares it: `@NullMarked` (org.jspecify.annotations) in each package's `package-info.java`, or once in `module-info.java`, and run NullAway (Error Prone) or the Checker Framework so the declaration is enforced. Then annotate the real exceptions `@Nullable` and resolve the suppressions rather than adding to them: a `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")` or `castToNonNull(x)` on a value the checker could show to be null is a `NullPointerException` waiting for the path that makes it true — where the value genuinely cannot be null, say something the checker can see instead (a null check, `Objects.requireNonNull`, a non-null field initialised in the constructor).
Do you agree with this assessment?
WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed
Statically assessed 10 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (18%; ≈20% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 45 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).
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.
Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 3 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 5 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.
P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 52 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.
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.
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
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — the service did not build — `mvn -B -q -DskipTests compile` exited -1: Tool stalled (no output) after 00:02:00.0052376.; runtime evidence skipped (launch chosen because customer-service/pom.xml declares spring-boot-starter-web and the Spring Boot Maven plugin) 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.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .java suite was found but not re-run
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 5 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 3 dependency(ies) and leaving 52 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 — Not scored — this repository's 3 declared JVM dependency coordinate(s) were read from its 5 Maven/Gradle manifest(s), but Maven Central could not be asked for the licence of 0 of them (no diagnostic), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
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.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — this repo declares itself a template / kata / sample / demo; a formal ADR log is deferred to a real application built from it.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
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 (.java), 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.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Scanner failed to run — not a clean result
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — Scanner failed to run — not a clean result
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
DM12 Ambient inputs in the domain — no domain-layer types detected — ambient-input check not applicable
DM2 Strongly-typed ids — no id-bearing domain types detected — strongly-typed-id adoption not assessable
DM3 Integration-event coupling — no integration events detected — coupling check not applicable
DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary — no domain-layer types detected — domain↔infrastructure boundary check not applicable
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (8 event handler(s))
ED5 Idempotency — Not assessed, and this one is on us: 8 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.
ES2 Immutable events — no persisted event types detected — immutability check not applicable
ES3 PII in the event store — no persisted event types detected — PII-in-events check not applicable
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.
P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — no outbound HTTP usage detected — no HTTP client call or construction in the JVM, JavaScript/TypeScript source (service entry point: customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/CustomerServiceApplication.java:6 (@SpringBootApplication))
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — `mvn jacoco:report`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `@Benchmark` in a Java, Kotlin or Scala file importing JMH or kotlinx-benchmark, Jetpack Benchmark's `measureRepeated` in a file importing androidx.benchmark, or JMH/kotlinx-benchmark/androidx.benchmark in a pom.xml, Gradle or sbt build, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Java code has 3,752 production line(s), 0 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Java was read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Java request off Android takes no token: it is cancelled through the handle it returns (Future.cancel, Call.cancel, a Disposable), ambiently (io.grpc.Context) or by interrupting its thread, not through a parameter
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.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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 — 21 finding(s)
AC2 · Forms & labels· <label> that labels no control · ×9
<label> that labels no control customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:45— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:56— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:66— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:45— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:56— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:88— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:99— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:110— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
<label> that labels no control restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:120— This <label> has no for and wraps no form control, so it names nothing: assistive tech never announces it, and clicking the caption focuses no field. Note that an id on the label is not an association — it is the TARGET of one, so a control still has to point at it. Give the label for="<the control's id>", move the control inside the label, or point the control's aria-labelledby at this label's id.
AC2 · Forms & labels· <input> without a programmatic label · ×9
<input> without a programmatic label customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:48— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:59— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:69— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:48— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:59— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:91— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:102— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:113— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:123— This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
D10 · Test Quality· No assertions (empty test) · ×2
No assertions (empty test): contextLoads customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java:12— Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
No assertions (empty test): contextLoads food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/FoodOrderingServiceApplicationTests.java:12— Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
No assertions: testAddCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/aggregate/CustomerAggregateTest.java:25— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testDeleteCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/aggregate/CustomerAggregateTest.java:52— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testUpdateCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/aggregate/CustomerAggregateTest.java:34— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testUpdateCustomer_whenAllFieldsNull_keepsOriginalValues customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/aggregate/CustomerAggregateTest.java:43— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testAddCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:93— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testAddCustomer_whenInvalidRequest_returnsBadRequest customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:114— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testDeleteCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:145— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:71— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetCustomerOrders customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:150— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetCustomers customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:49— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testUpdateCustomer customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:124— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetCustomers food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/customer/rest/CustomerControllerWebMvcTest.java:25— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCreateOrder food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/aggregate/OrderAggregateTest.java:30— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCreateOrder_withZeroTotal food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/aggregate/OrderAggregateTest.java:59— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCreateOrder food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/rest/OrderControllerWebMvcTest.java:96— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testCreateOrder_whenInvalidRequest_returnsBadRequest food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/rest/OrderControllerWebMvcTest.java:126— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetOrder food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/rest/OrderControllerWebMvcTest.java:70— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetOrders food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/rest/OrderControllerWebMvcTest.java:44— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: testGetRestaurants food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:28— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
Anemic entity: Dish restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Dish.java:20— `Dish` is an aggregate/entity with 4 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Anemic entity: Order restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Order.java:25— `Order` is an aggregate/entity with 8 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Anemic entity: Restaurant restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Restaurant.java:22— `Restaurant` is an aggregate/entity with 4 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Anemic entity: Customer customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Customer.java:21— `Customer` is an aggregate/entity with 4 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Anemic entity: Order customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Order.java:25— `Order` is an aggregate/entity with 7 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (4.4:1) customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:48— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (4.4:1) restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:48— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (4.4:1) restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:91— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (4.4:1) restaurant-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:102— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
DM7 · Repository granularity· Repository for a non-root entity · ×4
Repository for a non-root entity: OrderRepository → Order restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/OrderRepository.java:9— `OrderRepository` is a repository over `Order`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Order` through its owning aggregate instead.
Repository for a non-root entity: RestaurantRepository → Restaurant restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepository.java:8— `RestaurantRepository` is a repository over `Restaurant`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Restaurant` through its owning aggregate instead.
Repository for a non-root entity: CustomerRepository → Customer customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepository.java:8— `CustomerRepository` is a repository over `Customer`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Customer` through its owning aggregate instead.
Repository for a non-root entity: OrderRepository → Order customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/OrderRepository.java:9— `OrderRepository` is a repository over `Order`, which is an entity but not an aggregate root. Repositories should be per aggregate ROOT — loading/saving a child entity independently lets callers bypass the root's invariants. Access `Order` through its owning aggregate instead.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (3.9:1) food-ordering-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:86— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (3.9:1) food-ordering-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:112— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
Low contrast Tailwind colour pair (3.9:1) food-ordering-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:138— This element's Tailwind text/background colour utilities fall below the 4.5:1 WCAG AA minimum for normal text. Pick a darker or lighter shade.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:52— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:52-60 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:94-102 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:52` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `Dish` names `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.restaurant.model.Dish` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.restaurantservice.model.Dish` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:103` calls `setRestaurant` and `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:61` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:86— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:86-94 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:129-137 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/dto/CustomerResponse.java:1— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/dto/CustomerResponse.java:1-9 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/customer/rest/dto/CustomerResponse.java:1-9 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/rest/dto/CustomerResponse.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `Customer` names `com.ivanfranchin.customerservice.model.Customer` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.customer.model.Customer` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/rest/dto/OrderResponse.java:25— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/rest/dto/OrderResponse.java:25-34 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/dto/RestaurantOrderResponse.java:21-30 — 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `Order` names `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.order.model.Order` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.restaurantservice.model.Order` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:33— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:33-42 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:75-84 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:88— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:88-92 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:152-159 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:88` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/rest/dto/RestaurantResponse.java:15— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/rest/dto/RestaurantResponse.java:15-19 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/dto/RestaurantResponse.java:15-19 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/rest/dto/RestaurantResponse.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/dto/RestaurantResponse.java` as WHOLE FILES: 84% 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/rest/dto/RestaurantResponse.java:15` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `Restaurant` names `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.restaurant.model.Restaurant` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.restaurantservice.model.Restaurant` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
P8 · Schema migrations· Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto (no migration path) · ×2
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto (no migration path) customer-service/src/main/resources/application.properties:7— Hibernate ddl-auto builds the schema from the model at startup and keeps no migration history, so there is no reviewed, repeatable upgrade path for an existing production database — a renamed column is dropped and re-added rather than migrated. Adopt Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate`, so every schema change is a versioned file applied the same way in every environment.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto (no migration path) restaurant-service/src/main/resources/application.properties:7— Hibernate ddl-auto builds the schema from the model at startup and keeps no migration history, so there is no reviewed, repeatable upgrade path for an existing production database — a renamed column is dropped and re-added rather than migrated. Adopt Flyway or Liquibase, with `ddl-auto` set to `validate`, so every schema change is a versioned file applied the same way in every environment.
AC7 · A11y enforcement· Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no accessibility linting at author time and no automated accessibility check in tests or CI. Add your UI toolkit's own accessibility assertion to the test suite (Flutter `meetsGuideline`, Espresso `AccessibilityChecks`, XCTest `performAccessibilityAudit`), then gate that test in the pipeline. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:68— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:68-82 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:111-125 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (9–12 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/repository/OrderRepositoryProjector.java:48— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/repository/OrderRepositoryProjector.java:48-56 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:153-164 — 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `OrderItem` names `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.order.model.OrderItem` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.restaurantservice.model.OrderItem` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (29 lines × 3) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/AxonConfig.java:1— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/AxonConfig.java:1-29 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/config/AxonConfig.java:1-29 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/config/AxonConfig.java:1-29 — before extracting anything, compare `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/AxonConfig.java` and `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/config/AxonConfig.java` as WHOLE FILES: 86% 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/AxonConfig.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `CommandLoggingDispatchInterceptor` names `com.ivanfranchin.customerservice.interceptor.CommandLoggingDispatchInterceptor` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.order.interceptor.CommandLoggingDispatchInterceptor` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (25 lines × 3) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java:1— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java:1-25 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java:1-25 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java:1-25 — before extracting anything, compare `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java` and `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java` as WHOLE FILES: 94% 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/config/ErrorAttributesConfig.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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.
Duplicated block (51 lines × 2) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Order.java:1— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Order.java:1-51 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Order.java:1-52 — before extracting anything, compare `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Order.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/model/Order.java` as WHOLE FILES: 88% 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/model/Order.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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.
Duplicated block (22 lines × 3) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java:1— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java:1-22 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java:1-22 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java:1-22 — before extracting anything, compare `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java` and `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java` as WHOLE FILES: 93% 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketConfig.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (42 lines × 3) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1-42 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1-84 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1-56 — before extracting anything, compare `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java` and `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java` as WHOLE FILES: 93% 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (56 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1-84 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1-56 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java` as WHOLE FILES: 97% 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 2 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/websocket/WebSocketHandler.java:1` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:48— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:48-55 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/customer/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:20-27 — before extracting anything, compare `customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java` and `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/customer/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java` as WHOLE FILES: 88% 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `Customer` names `com.ivanfranchin.customerservice.model.Customer` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.customer.model.Customer` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:24— food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:24-30 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:66-72 — before extracting anything, compare `food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/restaurant/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` and `restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `Restaurant` names `com.ivanfranchin.foodorderingservice.restaurant.model.Restaurant` in one and `com.ivanfranchin.restaurantservice.model.Restaurant` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/customer/CustomerDeletedEvent.java:24— axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/customer/CustomerDeletedEvent.java:24-29 | axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantDeletedEvent.java:24-29 — 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. 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:36— customer-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/repository/CustomerRepositoryProjector.java:36-40 | food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/repository/OrderRepositoryProjector.java:31-35 | restaurant-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/repository/RestaurantRepositoryProjector.java:42-46 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `query` to `GetCustomerQuery` in one and `GetOrderQuery` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Third-party script without Subresource Integrity customer-service/src/main/resources/templates/index.html:7— `https://cdn.tailwindcss.com` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. The URL also names no version, so it resolves to whatever that origin serves at fetch time — the executed bytes can change with nobody touching this repository. 18 such include(s) across the repository's markup.
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:34— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:62— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testDeleteRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:52— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testDeleteRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:134— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testDeleteRestaurantDish_whenDishNotFound_throwsException restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:147— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:43— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:76— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurantDish_whenDishNotFound_throwsException restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:123— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurantDish_whenNameNull_keepsOriginalName restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:93— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurantDish_whenPriceNull_keepsOriginalPrice restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/aggregate/RestaurantAggregateTest.java:108— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:94— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:153— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurantDish_whenInvalidRequest_returnsBadRequest restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:174— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testAddRestaurant_whenInvalidRequest_returnsBadRequest restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:115— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testDeleteRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:146— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testDeleteRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:237— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testGetRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:71— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testGetRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:184— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testGetRestaurantOrders restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:246— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testGetRestaurants restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:51— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurant restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:125— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: testUpdateRestaurantDish restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/rest/RestaurantControllerWebMvcTest.java:215— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
No direct assertions: contextLoads restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/RestaurantServiceApplicationTests.java:12— No conventional assertion call was detected, and 23 of 36 tests in `restaurant-service` read the same way — so this is treated as that project's convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing.
Disabled test customer-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/customerservice/CustomerServiceApplicationTests.java:7— A test is skipped/ignored — coverage that looks present but never runs. Re-enable it or delete it so the green run means something.
Disabled test food-ordering-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/FoodOrderingServiceApplicationTests.java:7— A test is skipped/ignored — coverage that looks present but never runs. Re-enable it or delete it so the green run means something.
Disabled test restaurant-service/src/test/java/com/ivanfranchin/restaurantservice/RestaurantServiceApplicationTests.java:7— A test is skipped/ignored — coverage that looks present but never runs. Re-enable it or delete it so the green run means something.
Duplicated predicate axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantAddedEvent.java:38— `Objects.equals(id, that.id) && Objects.equals(name, that.name)` appears character-identically in 2 files — axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantAddedEvent.java, axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantUpdatedEvent.java. 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 axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/customer/CustomerAddedEvent.java:48— `Objects.equals(id, that.id) && Objects.equals(name, that.name) && Objects.equals(address, that.address)` appears character-identically in 2 files — axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/customer/CustomerAddedEvent.java, axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/customer/CustomerUpdatedEvent.java. 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 axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantDishAddedEvent.java:60— `Objects.equals(restaurantId, that.restaurantId) && Objects.equals(dishId, that.dishId) && Objects.equals(dishName, that.dishName) && Objects…` appears character-identically in 2 files — axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantDishAddedEvent.java, axon-event-commons/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/axoneventcommons/restaurant/RestaurantDishUpdatedEvent.java. 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.
D16 · Bus Factor· Small-team knowledge concentration · ×1
Small-team knowledge concentration — 1 file(s) are concentrated to one author — the ambient state with 2 active author(s), not 1 separate risks. The signal becomes meaningful as ownership spreads; no per-file action implied now.
D28 · Secrets (history)· Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
REDACTED
D34 · Knowledge Freshness· Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 1 of 9 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 9 of the 118 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/aggregate/OrderAggregate.java. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.
Orphaned file food-ordering-service/src/main/java/com/ivanfranchin/foodorderingservice/order/aggregate/OrderAggregate.java:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
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.
README/code drift README.md:54— README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists — searched for: `dockerfile`, `docker-compose`, `compose.yaml`, `compose.yml`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest and configuration files (package.json and other *.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.sln/*.slnx, *.yml, *.toml, *.config, tool configs such as eslint.config.js, Dockerfile); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
X5 · Nullable reference types· Java packages are not null-marked everywhere · ×1
Java packages are not null-marked everywhere — 0/53 of this repository's Java package directories are under a non-null default: a `package-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked` (JSpecify) or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, `@DefaultQualifier(NonNull.class)`; a `module-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked`; every type in it `@NullMarked`; or a build that runs NullAway with the package in `AnnotatedPackages`, or the Checker Framework's `NullnessChecker`. Elsewhere every reference admits null and no checker warns on the dereference that throws a `NullPointerException`.
Off the main sequence: axon-event-commons — axon-event-commons: abstractness 0.20, instability 0.00, distance 0.80 — the shape a shared-kernel / building-block library has BY DESIGN — concrete and widely depended-on is what makes it useful, and this dimension does not penalise it (the distance is reported for completeness, not as a defect). Worth a look only if it has grown past one coherent kernel into an everything-bucket.
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.
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
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.
provenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
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.
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.
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.
Run 01a16299-5570-7e41-bdab-9cadb81896d9 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 21 · Warnings: 59 · Recommendations: 38 · Info: 1 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 22-10-2026 @ 07:52 UTC.
Downloadable artifacts
Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.