j5ik2o/event-store-adapter-rs

Executive summary

j5ik2o/event-store-adapter-rs scores 58 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while four of its six lenses score higher still: Performance at 100 and Code Health at 93, both rated Exemplary, and Architecture at 89 and Production Readiness at 74, both rated Strong.

The score is lower than those four because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 47 and is rated Weak. Its Documentation accuracy dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality and to reconcile the README with reality: conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but `docs/spec/core-contract.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/spanner.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/spanner.md` does not exist, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 58 to about 63.

49 findings are critical: 45 in Static Analysis (SAST), three in IaC & Container Security and one in Test isolation.

Watchdog couldn't measure 14 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and License Compliance, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 19,934 lines, which would take an estimated 0.4 person-years, around €57,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 93 ★ Exemplary Architecture 89 Strong Maturity 47 Weak, capped by Documentation accuracy Production Readiness 74 Strong Security and Compliance 48 Weak, capped by Static Analysis (SAST) and Supply-chain Provenance & Signing Performance 100 ★ Exemplary

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

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

Maturity 47 · counts for 46%Security and Compliance 48 · counts for 25%Production Readiness 74 · counts for 14%Architecture 89 · counts for 8%Code Health 93 · counts for 4%Performance 100 · counts for 2%

If Maturity rose from 47 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 58 to about 63.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Product code 36%Tests 64%

New since the last survey: 102 findings

These 102 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 8 October 2026. The first 100 are listed here, and the findings file in the download package lists them all.

Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cyclomatic 51) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · FaultConnector::call (cyclomatic 36) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · Execution::execute (cyclomatic 25) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case (cyclomatic 25) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase (cyclomatic 23) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with (cyclomatic 23) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case (cyclomatic 23) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::check (cyclomatic 20) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · Checker::render_expr (cyclomatic 18) api-surface/check/src/check.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::transactions (cyclomatic 18) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::check_write_lock_usage (cyclomatic 18) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_api_surface_rs::render::render_type (cyclomatic 17) api-surface/check/src/render.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · Execution::observe (cyclomatic 16) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::layout::check_tables (cyclomatic 16) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/layout.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect (cyclomatic 16) lib/src/migration/inspect.rs
Cyclomatic Complexity · create-release-note-body.render (cyclomatic 16) .github/create-release-note-body.py
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cognitive 67) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cognitive Complexity · FaultConnector::call (cognitive 57) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::check (cognitive 47) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect (cognitive 45) lib/src/migration/inspect.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case (cognitive 38) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Cognitive Complexity · Execution::execute (cognitive 36) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with (cognitive 36) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case (cognitive 36) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase (cognitive 35) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs
Cognitive Complexity · Execution::observe (cognitive 33) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs
Cognitive Complexity · create-release-note-body.render (cognitive 33) .github/create-release-note-body.py
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::layout::check_tables (cognitive 30) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/layout.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::transactions (cognitive 27) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::check_write_lock_usage (cognitive 27) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::sequence (cognitive 26) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs::dynamodb::persist_event::classify_append_error (cognitive 24) lib/src/dynamodb/persist_event.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs::migration::bigtable::write::write (cognitive 23) lib/src/migration/bigtable/write.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::case::run_value (cognitive 22) conformance-runner/src/case.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::update (cognitive 22) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cognitive Complexity · Checker::check_associated_types (cognitive 21) api-surface/check/src/check.rs
Cognitive Complexity · Checker::render_expr (cognitive 20) api-surface/check/src/check.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::case::error_matches (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/case.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::item_aids (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::batch_get (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs::migration::write::write (cognitive 18) lib/src/migration/write.rs
Cognitive Complexity · Checker::check_constructor (cognitive 16) api-surface/check/src/check.rs
God Classes · MethodTooLong: FaultConnector.call conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs
God Classes · MethodTooLong: Execution.execute conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs
God Classes · FunctionTooLong: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
God Classes · ClassTooLong: Checker api-surface/check/src/check.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: src/check.rs api-surface/check/src/check.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs
God Classes · TooManyMethods: Checker api-surface/check/src/check.rs
God Classes · FunctionTooLong: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: target_dynamodb/transport.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: target_dynamodb/execute.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 52 shared lines) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (25 shared lines) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs
Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) migration-cli/src/main.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) migration-cli/src/main.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) api-surface/check/src/check.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/src/migration/inspect.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/envelope.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/backend.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) lib/src/bigtable/backend.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/mod.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/mod.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) lib/src/migration/bigtable/write.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/src/migration/sqlite/write.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/src/sqlite/backend.rs
Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot: lib/src/error.rs lib/src/error.rs
Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot: conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs
Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot: .github/create-release-note-body.py .github/create-release-note-body.py
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED

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

Fixed since the last survey: 16 findings

These 16 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 8 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_case (cyclomatic 32) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_case (cognitive 46) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::error_matches (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_value (cognitive 16) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: src/event_store_for_bigtable.rs lib/src/event_store_for_bigtable.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs
God Classes · ClassTooLong: DynamoDbBackend lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs
God Classes · FileTooLong: src/target_memory.rs conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) lib/src/event_store_for_bigtable.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) lib/src/event_store_for_sqlite.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) lib/src/event_store_for_bigtable.rs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (58 lines × 2) test-utils/src/dynamodb.rs
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED

Rebuild cost: about €57,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€19,000 to €95,000, for 316 to 1,003 hours of work, about 0.4 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem	Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor	×0.8 at a score of 58. 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: 19,934 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.

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.

Raises the score by about 8 points · Low effort · ADR Quality

Reconcile the README with reality: conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but `docs/spec/core-contract.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/spanner.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/spanner.md` does not exist.

Raises the score by about 7 points · Medium effort · Documentation accuracy

Resolve the 17 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 25 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once.

Raises the score by about 3 points · Medium effort · Static Analysis (SAST)

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 €57,000 to build again, about 0.4 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 47 (Weak). Maturity is about how well the project explains and looks after itself, which decides whether a new developer, or a new supplier, can take over. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Maturity also moves the score most.

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

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

If you do one thing first · First action

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 8 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 ADR 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.

105 modules, with 207 dependencies between them. 2 loops run through 6 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 65 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	1 event_store_adapter_api_surface_fixtures_rs.baseline	2 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.data	3 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.fault	4 event_store_adapter_rs.aggregate_id	5 event_store_adapter_rs.error	6 event_store_adapter_rs.retention	7 event_store_adapter_rs.serializer	8 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.report	9 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_dynamodb.transport	10 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.auth	11 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.envelope	12 event_store_adapter_rs.dynamodb.items	13 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.legacy_key	14 event_store_adapter_rs.storage_backend	16 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.case	17 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.runner	18 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_dynamodb.request	19 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.rows	20 event_store_adapter_rs.dynamodb	21 event_store_adapter_rs.generic_event_store	22 event_store_adapter_rs.memory.storage	23 event_store_adapter_rs.sqlite.backend	24 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.hook_faults	26 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_memory.stores	27 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.backend	28 event_store_adapter_rs.memory	30 event_store_adapter_rs.migration	31 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.bigtable.legacy	32 event_store_adapter_rs.sqlite	34 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable	35 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.bigtable.inspect	36 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_bigtable.execute
1 event_store_adapter_api_surface_fixtures_rs.baseline
2 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.data
3 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.fault
4 event_store_adapter_rs.aggregate_id
5 event_store_adapter_rs.error
6 event_store_adapter_rs.retention
7 event_store_adapter_rs.serializer
8 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.report		1
9 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_dynamodb.transport			6														5
10 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.auth					1																									1
11 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.envelope	1				2
12 event_store_adapter_rs.dynamodb.items				2
13 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.legacy_key	1			1
14 event_store_adapter_rs.storage_backend	2			2	1
15 event_store_adapter_api_surface_rs.check													1
16 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.case	4	1						1
17 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.runner		3	1					3
18 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_dynamodb.request			1						1
19 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.rows	1				3					1
20 event_store_adapter_rs.dynamodb	3			1		1								1
21 event_store_adapter_rs.generic_event_store	6				1									1
22 event_store_adapter_rs.memory.storage				1	1	2						1
23 event_store_adapter_rs.sqlite.backend	1			2	2									2
24 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.hook_faults			5												1
25 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_dynamodb.execute		2					2	2	3						1	1	2
26 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_memory.stores	4					3									2						5
27 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.backend	1			3	4						2			2				1
28 event_store_adapter_rs.memory	3			1																1	1
29 event_store_adapter_rs.memory.backend	1			2	2									2							2
30 event_store_adapter_rs.migration																			1
31 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.bigtable.legacy				1							1	1						1
32 event_store_adapter_rs.sqlite	3			2		1														1		1
33 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_memory		1		1			2	1								1							1	2		1
34 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable	3			2		1														1					1
35 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.bigtable.inspect				1														2									2	3
36 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_bigtable.execute		1		1			2	1								1							1							3
37 event_store_adapter_migration_rs																			1								1			2
38 event_store_adapter_rs.bigtable.configuration	1				2					1								2												3
39 event_store_adapter_rs.migration.bigtable.write				1														1							1		3	1			1
40 event_store_adapter_conformance_rs.target_sqlite.execute		1		1			2	1								1							1	1					2			1

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 93% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 7.4 D3 · Rust God Classes 8.9 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.4 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 10.0 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X3 · Repo Exception handling 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 10.0

The Bad

D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 5.7

At a glance — Architecture · 89% · Strong ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 8.0 D6 · Rust Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 7.0 D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 10.0 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.3 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 7.5 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

At a glance — Maturity · 47% · Weak · gated by M4 ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.9 D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 9.0 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0

The Bad

M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 6.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 5.0

The Ugly

D20 · Rust ADR Quality 0.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 74% · Strong ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D12 · Rust Dependency Hygiene 10.0 D13 · Rust Secret Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 10.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 7.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Bad

P2 · Repo Observability 6.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0

At a glance — Security · 48% · Weak · gated by D29, D36 ·

The Good

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 10.0 D31 · Rust IaC & Container Security 9.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0

The Ugly

D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 0.1 D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 0.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A05:2025 — Injection	66	High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	7	Medium
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration	3	High / Critical

Roadmap

First, address the missing architectural decision records and resolve the static analysis findings related to mutable action tags to strengthen our design traceability and supply chain security. Next, fix the broken links in the documentation to ensure all referenced specifications are accurate and accessible. Finally, add a quick start section to the root README to help new contributors build and run the project immediately.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.	+7.7 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Reconcile the README with reality: conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but `docs/spec/core-contract.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/spanner.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/spanner.md` does not exist.	+6.7 pts	Medium	Documentation accuracy
Resolve the 17 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 25 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once.	+2.6 pts	Medium	Static Analysis (SAST)
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.	+2.6 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED.	+1.3 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED.	+1.3 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 3 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (3).	+1.3 pts	Low	IaC & Container Security
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.	+1.9 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 45 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 4% slop · 80% mixed · 16% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	1.6	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	2.3	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.6	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED	6.3	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case (cyclomatic 25)
conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cyclomatic 51)
api-surface/check/src/check.rs	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Checker::render_expr (cyclomatic 18)
conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs	7.1	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: Execution::execute (cyclomatic 25)
conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs	7.1	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase (cyclomatic 23)
lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs	7.1	Mixed	Code Duplication: Near-duplicate member pair (25 shared lines)
conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: FaultConnector::call (cyclomatic 36)
conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with (cyclomatic 23)
conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs	7.2	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case (cyclomatic 23)
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED

How the grades work

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

Critical — 49

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 — 119

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 — 53

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

Could not be resolved — 15

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

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 53 of 57 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.

What we checked — 57 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D12D13D15D17D19D20D21D22D26D28D29D31D34D35D36AX10AX3AX4AX8AX9M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6PF3X1X12X13X14X15X17X19X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X4

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, 204 of 221 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a16384-608c-7388-bf32-71052e2d8518.

The exact command behind every deep-scan dimension — tool, version, invocation and retained raw output — is in Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail.

Run transparency — what happened this run

What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.

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 (.rs) 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 (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.rs) and this repository declares a Cargo test suite (repository root, 87 test files), but it was not re-run: its build outgrew the 6 GB scratch ceiling (6.714 GB measured) and was stopped; its suite was not run. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository declares Cargo manifests but commits no Cargo.lock, so its dependency graph was closed from the manifests over the crates.io index, and part of it could not be read: no published release of bollard-stubs satisfies `=1.53.1-rc.29.3.1`. A licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. NOT a finding that this repository's licences are compliant: this dimension asserts nothing about its licensing in either direction.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable (1 contributor(s) across 647 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). Concentration needs a team to concentrate: with one contributor there is nobody to spread the knowledge to, so there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
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: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 'osv-scanner' exited 128 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.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 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. `REDACTED`, `.claude/tools/aidlc-steering.ts` produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
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: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 'osv-scanner' exited 128 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.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a Dockerfile) is simply not read here yet.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
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 DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 15 — the compose project is invalid) — time="2026-10-22T12:09:46Z" level=warning msg="The \"OTELCOL_ARGS\" variable is not set. Defaulting to a blank string." time="2026-10-22T12:09:46Z" level=warning msg="The \"OTELCOL_IMG\" variable is not set. Defaulting to a blank string." service "otel-collector" has neither an image nor a build context specified: invalid compose project; runtime evidence skipped.
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 no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Python, Rust is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Python, Rust 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.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Dart, Ruby, Scala and PHP source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Dart, Ruby, Scala or PHP was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax and MSBuild project configuration, TypeScript source and its tsconfig files, Java source and its package and module declarations, PHP source and its PHPStan and Psalm configuration, Dart source and its pubspec language version, Ruby source and its Sorbet and Steep configuration, Scala source and its build's explicit-nulls, WartRemover and Scalafix settings, and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no TypeScript was found, and this repository's Python, Rust 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.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

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

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity7.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.

Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

17 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint at 51. A further 1 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being ConfigurationReason::fmt at 26 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 1 file carries no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of its over-threshold functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: lib/src/error.rs (ConfigurationReason::fmt at 26). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cyclomatic 51) · ×10conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:318

Execution::execute (cyclomatic 25) · ×2conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:220

FaultConnector::call (cyclomatic 36)conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348

Checker::render_expr (cyclomatic 18)api-surface/check/src/check.rs:248

event_store_adapter_api_surface_rs::render::render_type (cyclomatic 17)api-surface/check/src/render.rs:11

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

What to do

Bring the 2 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cyclomatic 51), FaultConnector::call (cyclomatic 36). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 2 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 7.4 to about 7.9/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity5.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

28 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint at 67.

event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cognitive 67) · ×17conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:318

event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect (cognitive 45) · ×4lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:53

Checker::check_associated_types (cognitive 21) · ×3api-surface/check/src/check.rs:798

Execution::execute (cognitive 36) · ×2conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:220

FaultConnector::call (cognitive 57)conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348

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

What to do

Bring the 1 body over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cognitive 67). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 5.7 to about 5.9/10.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes8.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

10 god class(es) detected.

FileTooLong: src/check.rs · ×4api-surface/check/src/check.rs

MethodTooLong: FaultConnector.call · ×2conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348

FunctionTooLong: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint · ×2conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:318

ClassTooLong: Checkerapi-surface/check/src/check.rs:65

TooManyMethods: Checkerapi-surface/check/src/check.rs:65

What to do

Resolve the 4 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with check.rs, check_requests.rs, transport.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with transport.rs, execute.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with check_requests.rs, target_memory.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.4 / 10Stronggated by 30 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

27 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 3 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×4api-surface/check/src/check.rs:272

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×3lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs:391

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×3lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:61

Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) · ×2conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:202

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:263

+ 15 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with check.rs, configuration.rs, backend.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with rows.rs, inspect.rs, mod.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with inspect.rs, write.rs, backend.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 production modules (Cargo), 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: event-store-adapter-rs

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

0 of 39 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

998 test methods: 314 unit, 684 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 998 `#[test]` function(s) across 87 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 37 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D12 · Dependency Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 outdated, 0 yanked direct Cargo dependencies. Only DIRECT edges are graded: a transitive crate cannot be moved past what its parent's requirement admits, so reporting one would be advice its owner cannot take. A newer release is reported only where this repository's OWN requirement already admits it, so the remedy is `cargo update` and never a manifest edit — which means a release outside the declared range is deliberately NOT charged, because a written-down constraint is a decision rather than a defect. Note that a bare requirement is a CARET, and for a 0.x crate its ceiling is the minor. Whether any crate is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — crates.io publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from Cargo.lock there.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.9 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Top hotspots: lib/src/error.rs (6×26=156); conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs (4×36=144); conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs (6×23=138)

Hotspot: lib/src/error.rs · ×4lib/src/error.rs:149

What to do

Resolve the 4 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with error.rs, transport.rs, target_memory.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

0 deducted task-comment markers across 19934 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.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's documentation is strong: the READMEs describe each directory and its contents (MIGRATION_GUIDE_v5.ja for Rust v3→5 migration, SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA for SQLite storage schema), a comprehensive architecture review covering ports/ports-and-adapters style, and an outline of every visible document. The MIGRATION_GUIDE is the project's own README; it lacks an overview/installation/contributing section but only documents what it covers. (9 of 19 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 2 evaluation groups failed.)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

5 API inconsistencies across 59 exposed types.

Inconsistent factory method naming and parameter ordering. The Bigtable adapter exposes multiple 'open' variants that differ by optional parameters (token_source, hooks) but lack a unified builder pattern or consistent overloading strategy. Some methods take serializers, others take hooks, some take both, some take neither. This forces users to memorize specific method names for different configuration combinations rather than using a single fluent API.

Inconsistent factory method naming compared to Bigtable. While similar to Bigtable, the SQLite adapter also suffers from multiple 'open' variants. However, the inconsistency is more pronounced because the Bigtable adapter has 5 open variants while SQLite has 3, and they don't map 1:1 (e.g., Bigtable has 'open_with_token_source' but SQLite does not have an equivalent 'open_with_token_source' method, instead relying on the connection object). This creates confusion when switching between storage backends.

Inconsistent factory method naming. DynamoDB has 'open_with_serializers' and 'open', but lacks the 'open_with_hooks' variant that Bigtable and SQLite have. This asymmetry makes it difficult to write generic code that works across different storage backends, as the method to inject test hooks or custom serializers varies by implementation.

Inconsistent factory method naming. Memory adapter uses 'with_serializers' (setter-style) and 'new' (constructor-style), while other adapters use 'open' or 'open_with_*'. This breaks the pattern of using 'open' for initialization across the library.

Inconsistent method location. 'history_view' is a method on the EventStore implementations (Bigtable, SQLite) but is a method on the underlying Storage (MemoryStorage) rather than the EventStore wrapper. This inconsistency makes it unclear whether history_view is a high-level event store operation or a low-level storage operation, complicating the abstraction layer.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Inconsistent factory method naming and parameter ordering. The Bigtable… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent factory method naming compared to Bigtable. While similar… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent factory method naming. DynamoDB has 'open_with_serializers'… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 of 5 build units (Cargo) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.1 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

66 finding(s): 0 critical, 45 high, 21 medium, 0 low. 25 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 7 file(s) — `REDACTED` (line 2179), `.claude/tools/aidlc-steering.ts` (lines 44–45), `REDACTED`, `.takt/workflows/ddd-implement.yaml`, `.takt/workflows/ddd-remediation.yaml`, … (+2 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 3 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

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

What to do

Resolve the 17 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 25 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (42 issue-level, 17 of them charged here).
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.0 / 10Adequategated by 3 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 3 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 84 of the 100 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

REDACTED

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

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

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

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX8 · Test isolation7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

`event-store-adapter-conformance-rs` (production) references the test project `event-store-adapter-test-utils-rs`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.

What to do

Remove every production → test project reference: extract any shared test helper into a production support library (which the tests reference), or invert the dependency so the test project depends on production — not the reverse.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 7 of 7 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy0.0 / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but `docs/spec/core-contract.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/spanner.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/spanner.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/bigtable.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/bigtable.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/hash.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/hash.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:3
conformance/README.md names `tools/conformance/data.py`, but no file or folder `tools/conformance/data.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:54
conformance/README.md names `tools/conformance/uv.lock`, but no file or folder `tools/conformance/uv.lock` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:264
conformance/README.md names `tools/conformance/reference_model.py`, but no file or folder `tools/conformance/reference_model.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — conformance/README.md:285
docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md documents the environment variable `SQLITE_BUSY`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md:172
docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md documents the environment variable `SQLITE_LOCKED`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md:172
docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but no file or folder `docs/spec/core-contract.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:10
docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but no file or folder `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:11
docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but no file or folder `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:12
docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/plan/implementation-plan.md`, but no file or folder `docs/plan/implementation-plan.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:13
docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/adr/`, but no file or folder `docs/adr` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:14
docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_backend.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_backend.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:118
docs/design/next-major.md names `dynamodb.md`, but no file or folder `dynamodb.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:470
docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/types.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/types.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:652
docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/key_resolver.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/key_resolver.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:652
docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_for_memory.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_for_memory.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:686
docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:808
docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_test_support.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_test_support.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:1081
docs/design/next-major.md names `tools/spikes/dynamodb-emulators/README.md`, but no file or folder `tools/spikes/dynamodb-emulators/README.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:1448
docs/design/next-major.md documents the environment variable `TEST_TIME_FACTOR`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:1496
docs/design/next-major.md names `.ja.md`, but no file or folder `.ja.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/design/next-major.md:1745

What to do

Reconcile the README with reality: conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but `docs/spec/core-contract.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md` does not exist; conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/spanner.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/spanner.md` does not exist.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P10 · Library API & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Only 2/3 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `migration-cli`.

What to do

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry with tracing-opentelemetry) and a health-check endpoint (a /health route on your axum/actix router) for operability.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

What to do

Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
Deployment is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever reaches the release trigger goes to production unreviewed, so a mistaken merge or tag is live before anyone can stop it.

What to do

Add a `healthcheck:` to the served compose service — probing the endpoint it already answers on where it has one — with `depends_on: condition: service_healthy` on whatever waits for it, and keep the deployed image tag immutable and recorded so rolling back is re-pointing at the previous tag rather than rebuilding.
Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X3 · Exception handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X4 · Structured logging10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	93%	Exemplary	Solid.
Architecture	89%	Strong	Solid.
Maturity	47%	Weak — gated by M4	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	74%	Strong	Solid.
Security	48%	Weak — gated by D29, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.

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 — 17 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not evidenced — 1 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.

P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 61 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: Rust with no dependency-injection crate has no container to hand one lifetime's instance to another — every value is owned by the code that builds it, and the borrow checker rejects a longer-lived value keeping a borrow of a shorter-lived one.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No function in this Python code is served by a threaded web framework (a Flask, Bottle or FastAPI route, a Django or Pyramid view), so no module is shared between request threads. Rust's compiler refuses unsynchronised shared mutation — a value shared across threads must be Sync — so the race this check looks for cannot be written.
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 15 — the compose project is invalid) — time="2026-10-22T12:09:46Z" level=warning msg="The \"OTELCOL_ARGS\" variable is not set. Defaulting to a blank string." time="2026-10-22T12:09:46Z" level=warning msg="The \"OTELCOL_IMG\" variable is not set. Defaulting to a blank string." service "otel-collector" has neither an image nor a build context specified: invalid compose project; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Diesel schema, a SeaORM entity, a Diesel or sqlx row struct, or a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store crate (sqlx, Diesel, SeaORM, rusqlite, tokio-postgres, MongoDB, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect.
C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — this repository starts no server another machine can reach (no actix-web HttpServer, axum::serve, Rocket launch, warp::serve, poem or salvo Server, tonic Server::builder, hyper or tiny_http server outside examples and tests, none bound beyond loopback). Access control is therefore N/A here — a crate is authorized by the application that serves it, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Diesel schema, a SeaORM entity, a Diesel or sqlx row struct, or a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store crate (sqlx, Diesel, SeaORM, rusqlite, tokio-postgres, MongoDB, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no sensitive data whose changes an audit trail would record. If it does (through a store configured outside this repository, for instance), the trail belongs to wherever that data is stored.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Diesel schema, a SeaORM entity, a Diesel or sqlx row struct, or a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store crate (sqlx, Diesel, SeaORM, rusqlite, tokio-postgres, MongoDB, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Diesel schema, a SeaORM entity, a Diesel or sqlx row struct, or a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store crate (sqlx, Diesel, SeaORM, rusqlite, tokio-postgres, MongoDB, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
D10 Test Quality — ~35197 lines of test source are present (.rs) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .rs suite was found but not re-run
D14 License Compliance — Crate licences not graded — the lock-less Cargo graph could not be read in full
D16 Bus Factor — single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.rs), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Scanner failed to run — not a clean result
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 2 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
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
D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (13 value object(s))
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the Python, Rust source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `#[bench]`, criterion's `bench_function`/`bench_with_input`, `#[divan::bench]` or `#[library_benchmark]` in any `.rs` file, or criterion, divan, iai or a `[[bench]]` target in a Cargo.toml, 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: Rust spells out every heap allocation and makes borrowed slices (&[T], &str) its ordinary parameter types, so the allocation-aware style this card rewards elsewhere is the language's baseline rather than a rung to climb.
S1 Web-Security Posture — No web surface: 93 Rust file(s) were read for weak hashes and ciphers, key material fixed in the source, disabled TLS certificate validation and obsolete TLS versions, and none was found. This repository builds on an HTTP-server crate (`tonic` (Cargo.toml)) but serves no HTTP of its own: its production source starts no server (no `HttpServer::new`, `axum::serve`, `Server::bind`, tonic `Server::builder()…serve`, `rocket::build()`, `warp::serve`, `serve_connection` or the like — its examples and tests are not production source), so it is a library whose server controls belong to the application that serves it — HTTPS enforcement, HSTS, cookie flags and input validation are N/A here, as they are for a C# library. If this codebase starts serving HTTP, the dimension reactivates automatically.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Python and Rust were read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Python request takes no token: asyncio cancels the task and trio or anyio the scope that made it, from outside the call, and requests, httpx, aiohttp and gRPC take a timeout, not a cancellation; a Rust request takes no token: a future is cancelled by dropping it, from outside the call (select!, a timeout, an aborted task), and reqwest, hyper and tonic take none
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
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.
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 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 — 49 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 17 more in this group — see findings.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

AX8 · Test isolation · Production project references a test project · ×1

Production project references a test project: event-store-adapter-conformance-rs → event-store-adapter-test-utils-rs — `event-store-adapter-conformance-rs` (production) references the test project `event-store-adapter-test-utils-rs`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.

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

REDACTED

Serious — 119 finding(s)

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs · ×17

event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cognitive 67) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:318 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint has cognitive complexity 67 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 31 (50 pts), boolean chains 9, loops 2 (5 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 23). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::check (cognitive 47) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:706 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::check has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (30 pts), loops 6 (15 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case (cognitive 38) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:168 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 13 (22 pts), if/else 9 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with (cognitive 36) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:109 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 11 (19 pts), if/else 11 (16 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case (cognitive 36) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:237 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 12 (21 pts), if/else 9 (14 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase (cognitive 35) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs:266 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (22 pts), boolean chains 8, loops 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 13). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::layout::check_tables (cognitive 30) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/layout.rs:71 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::layout::check_tables has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::data::verify_manifest (cognitive 29) conformance-runner/src/data.rs:267 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::data::verify_manifest has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), match/switch 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::transactions (cognitive 27) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs:141 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::transactions has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), match/switch 4 (12 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::check_write_lock_usage (cognitive 27) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:140 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::check_write_lock_usage has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (22 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::sequence (cognitive 26) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:257 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::sequence has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (19 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::aid::matches_expected_error (cognitive 24) conformance-runner/src/aid.rs:69 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::aid::matches_expected_error has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), loops 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::case::run_value (cognitive 22) conformance-runner/src/case.rs:362 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::case::run_value has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (11 pts), if/else 3 (8 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::update (cognitive 22) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:159 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::update has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), loops 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::case::error_matches (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/case.rs:104 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::case::error_matches has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::item_aids (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:590 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::item_aids has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 5 (12 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 12). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::batch_get (cognitive 20) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs:214 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::batch_get has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_conformance_rs · ×10

event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint (cyclomatic 51) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:318 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint has cyclomatic complexity 51 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case (cyclomatic 25) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:168 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_bigtable::execute::run_case has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase (cyclomatic 23) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs:266 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::phase has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with (cyclomatic 23) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:109 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case (cyclomatic 23) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:237 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::run_case has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::check (cyclomatic 20) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:706 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::check has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::transactions (cyclomatic 18) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/request.rs:141 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::request::transactions has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::check_write_lock_usage (cyclomatic 18) conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:140 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_sqlite::execute::check_write_lock_usage has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::data::verify_manifest (cyclomatic 17) conformance-runner/src/data.rs:267 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::data::verify_manifest has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::layout::check_tables (cyclomatic 16) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/layout.rs:71 — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::layout::check_tables has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×4

Hotspot: lib/src/error.rs lib/src/error.rs:149 — lib/src/error.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in ConfigurationReason::fmt at line 149. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 5 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-23..2026-10-21, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-23 16:53:37 +00:00' --until='2026-10-21 16:53:37 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- lib/src/error.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348 — conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 36 in FaultConnector::call at line 348. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-23..2026-10-21, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-23 16:53:37 +00:00' --until='2026-10-21 16:53:37 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:109 — conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with at line 109. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-23..2026-10-21, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-23 16:53:37 +00:00' --until='2026-10-21 16:53:37 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: .github/create-release-note-body.py .github/create-release-note-body.py:91 — .github/create-release-note-body.py changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in create-release-note-body.render at line 91. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-23..2026-10-21, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-23 16:53:37 +00:00' --until='2026-10-21 16:53:37 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- .github/create-release-note-body.py`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs · ×4

event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect (cognitive 45) lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:53 — event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (26 pts), match/switch 3 (10 pts), loops 6 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 30). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_rs::dynamodb::persist_event::classify_append_error (cognitive 24) lib/src/dynamodb/persist_event.rs:182 — event_store_adapter_rs::dynamodb::persist_event::classify_append_error has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (21 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
event_store_adapter_rs::migration::bigtable::write::write (cognitive 23) lib/src/migration/bigtable/write.rs:170 — event_store_adapter_rs::migration::bigtable::write::write has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (14 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
event_store_adapter_rs::migration::write::write (cognitive 18) lib/src/migration/write.rs:13 — event_store_adapter_rs::migration::write::write has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), loops 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×4

FileTooLong: src/check.rs api-surface/check/src/check.rs — FileTooLong — 733 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 89% of them inside a single declaration: Checker (2 blocks, 65-1018). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 233 over it, 1.47× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs — FileTooLong — 591 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 91 over it, 1.18× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: target_dynamodb/transport.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs — FileTooLong — 532 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 32 over it, 1.06× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: target_dynamodb/execute.rs conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs — FileTooLong — 511 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 77% of them inside a single declaration: Execution (3 blocks, 105-600). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 11 over it, 1.02× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.

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

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) api-surface/check/src/check.rs:272 — api-surface/check/src/check.rs:272-278 | api-surface/check/src/check.rs:281-287 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:149 — lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:149-155 | lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs:128-134 — before extracting anything, compare `lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs` and `lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/backend.rs:47 — lib/src/bigtable/backend.rs:47-53 | lib/src/sqlite/backend.rs:35-41 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/mod.rs:183 — lib/src/bigtable/mod.rs:183-189 | lib/src/sqlite/mod.rs:91-97 — 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Checker · ×3

Checker::check_associated_types (cognitive 21) api-surface/check/src/check.rs:798 — Checker::check_associated_types has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 5 (7 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Checker::render_expr (cognitive 20) api-surface/check/src/check.rs:248 — Checker::render_expr has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), match/switch 4 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 7). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
Checker::check_constructor (cognitive 16) api-surface/check/src/check.rs:558 — Checker::check_constructor has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), match/switch 3 (6 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs:391 — lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs:391-400 | lib/src/migration/bigtable/read.rs:48-57 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs:85 — lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs:85-94 | lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs:136-145 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/mod.rs:349 — lib/src/bigtable/mod.rs:349-358 | lib/src/dynamodb/mod.rs:144-153 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:61 — lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:61-66 | lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:114-119 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/src/migration/sqlite/write.rs:53 — lib/src/migration/sqlite/write.rs:53-58 | lib/src/migration/sqlite/write.rs:135-141 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/src/sqlite/backend.rs:226 — lib/src/sqlite/backend.rs:226-231 | lib/src/sqlite/backend.rs:294-299 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Execution · ×2

Execution::execute (cyclomatic 25) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:220 — Execution::execute has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Execution::observe (cyclomatic 16) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:495 — Execution::observe has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Execution · ×2

Execution::execute (cognitive 36) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:220 — Execution::execute has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (21 pts), match/switch 7 (10 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
Execution::observe (cognitive 33) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:495 — Execution::observe has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), match/switch 4 (12 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×2

MethodTooLong: FaultConnector.call conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348 — MethodTooLong — call runs 260 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 160 over it, 2.60× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Execution.execute conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/execute.rs:220 — MethodTooLong — execute runs 228 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 128 over it, 2.28× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×2

FunctionTooLong: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/check_requests.rs:318 — FunctionTooLong — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_dynamodb::check_requests::constraint runs 197 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 97 over it, 1.97× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:109 — FunctionTooLong — event_store_adapter_conformance_rs::target_memory::run_with runs 109 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 9 over it, 1.09× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:202 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:202-212 | conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:144-154 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:262-272 — before extracting anything, compare `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 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 (11 lines × 3) migration-cli/src/main.rs:103 — migration-cli/src/main.rs:103-113 | migration-cli/src/main.rs:152-162 | migration-cli/src/main.rs:194-204 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

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

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:263 — conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:263-271 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:359-367 — before extracting anything, compare `conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 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 (9 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:121 — lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:121-129 | lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs:81-89 — before extracting anything, compare `lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs` and `lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/envelope.rs:80 — lib/src/bigtable/envelope.rs:80-84 | lib/src/bigtable/envelope.rs:92-96 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:140 — lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:140-144 | lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs:119-123 — before extracting anything, compare `lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs` and `lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · FaultConnector · ×1

FaultConnector::call (cyclomatic 36) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348 — FaultConnector::call has cyclomatic complexity 36 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Checker · ×1

Checker::render_expr (cyclomatic 18) api-surface/check/src/check.rs:248 — Checker::render_expr has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_api_surface_rs · ×1

event_store_adapter_api_surface_rs::render::render_type (cyclomatic 17) api-surface/check/src/render.rs:11 — event_store_adapter_api_surface_rs::render::render_type has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · event_store_adapter_rs · ×1

event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect (cyclomatic 16) lib/src/migration/inspect.rs:53 — event_store_adapter_rs::migration::inspect::inspect has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · create-release-note-body.render (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

create-release-note-body.render (cyclomatic 16) .github/create-release-note-body.py:91 — create-release-note-body.render has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FaultConnector · ×1

FaultConnector::call (cognitive 57) conformance-runner/src/target_dynamodb/transport.rs:348 — FaultConnector::call has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 32 (46 pts), match/switch 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · create-release-note-body.render (cognitive 33) · ×1

create-release-note-body.render (cognitive 33) .github/create-release-note-body.py:91 — create-release-note-body.render has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (21 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent factory method naming and parameter ordering. The Bigtable adapter exposes multiple 'open' variants that differ by optional parameters (token_source, hooks) but lack a unified builder pattern or consistent overloading strategy. Some methods take serializers, others take hooks, some take both, some take neither. This forces users to memorize specific method names for different configuration combinations rather than using a single fluent API. · ×1

Inconsistent factory method naming and parameter ordering. The Bigtable adapter exposes multiple 'open' variants that differ by optional parameters (token_source, hooks) but lack a unified builder pattern or consistent overloading strategy. Some methods take serializers, others take hooks, some take both, some take neither. This forces users to memorize specific method names for different configuration combinations rather than using a single fluent API. — Introduce a builder pattern (e.g., BigtableEventStoreBuilder) or a single 'open' method that accepts a configuration struct containing optional serializers, hooks, and token sources. This reduces the number of entry points and makes the API extensible without adding new method signatures for every combination. (signatures: EventStoreForBigtable.open_with_serializers | EventStoreForBigtable.open_with_hooks | EventStoreForBigtable.open_with_hooks_and_token_source | EventStoreForBigtable.open_with_token_source | EventStoreForBigtable.open)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent factory method naming compared to Bigtable. While similar to Bigtable, the SQLite adapter also suffers from multiple 'open' variants. However, the inconsistency is more pronounced because the Bigtable adapter has 5 open variants while SQLite has 3, and they don't map 1 · ×1

Inconsistent factory method naming compared to Bigtable. While similar to Bigtable, the SQLite adapter also suffers from multiple 'open' variants. However, the inconsistency is more pronounced because the Bigtable adapter has 5 open variants while SQLite has 3, and they don't map 1:1 (e.g., Bigtable has 'open_with_token_source' but SQLite does not have an equivalent 'open_with_token_source' method, instead relying on the connection object). This creates confusion when switching between storage backends. — Standardize the factory pattern across all adapters. Either all adapters should use a builder pattern, or all should use a single 'open' method with a comprehensive options struct. If multiple methods are kept, ensure they have consistent names and parameter orders across all storage implementations (Bigtable, DynamoDB, SQLite, Memory). (signatures: EventStoreForSqlite.open_with_serializers | EventStoreForSqlite.open_with_hooks | EventStoreForSqlite.open)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent factory method naming. DynamoDB has 'open_with_serializers' and 'open', but lacks the 'open_with_hooks' variant that Bigtable and SQLite have. This asymmetry makes it difficult to write generic code that works across different storage backends, as the method to inject test hooks or custom serializers varies by implementation. · ×1

Inconsistent factory method naming. DynamoDB has 'open_with_serializers' and 'open', but lacks the 'open_with_hooks' variant that Bigtable and SQLite have. This asymmetry makes it difficult to write generic code that works across different storage backends, as the method to inject test hooks or custom serializers varies by implementation. — Add 'open_with_hooks' to DynamoDB to match Bigtable and SQLite, or remove 'open_with_serializers' from all adapters in favor of a single 'open' with a config struct. Consistency across all storage adapters is critical for a library providing multiple backends. (signatures: EventStoreForDynamoDB.open_with_serializers | EventStoreForDynamoDB.open)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent factory method naming. Memory adapter uses 'with_serializers' (setter-style) and 'new' (constructor-style), while other adapters use 'open' or 'open_with_*'. This breaks the pattern of using 'open' for initialization across the library. · ×1

Inconsistent factory method naming. Memory adapter uses 'with_serializers' (setter-style) and 'new' (constructor-style), while other adapters use 'open' or 'open_with_*'. This breaks the pattern of using 'open' for initialization across the library. — Rename 'with_serializers' to 'open_with_serializers' and 'new' to 'open' to align with the naming convention used in Bigtable, SQLite, and DynamoDB adapters. (signatures: EventStoreForMemory.with_serializers | EventStoreForMemory.new)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent method location. 'history_view' is a method on the EventStore implementations (Bigtable, SQLite) but is a method on the underlying Storage (MemoryStorage) rather than the EventStore wrapper. This inconsistency makes it unclear whether history_view is a high-level event store operation or a low-level storage operation, complicating the abstraction layer. · ×1

Inconsistent method location. 'history_view' is a method on the EventStore implementations (Bigtable, SQLite) but is a method on the underlying Storage (MemoryStorage) rather than the EventStore wrapper. This inconsistency makes it unclear whether history_view is a high-level event store operation or a low-level storage operation, complicating the abstraction layer. — Move 'history_view' to the EventStore trait/interface for all adapters, or remove it from the storage layer if it is not a core event store operation. Ensure that all adapters expose the same set of high-level methods on the EventStore type. (signatures: EventStoreForBigtable.history_view | EventStoreForSqlite.history_view | MemoryStorage.history_view)

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

REDACTED

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×1

ClassTooLong: Checker api-surface/check/src/check.rs:65 — ClassTooLong — 655 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 35 methods, 2 blocks, lines 65-1018. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 255 over it, 1.64× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×1

TooManyMethods: Checker api-surface/check/src/check.rs:65 — TooManyMethods — 35 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 5 over it, 1.17× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 52 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 52 shared lines) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:168 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:168-295 | conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:114-251 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:237-347 — These 3 members are variants of one another: a block of 52 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 3 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 3 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (25 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member pair (25 shared lines) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:135 — lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:135-173 | lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs:114-153 — These two members are variants of one another: 25 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) · ×1

Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs:81 — lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs:81-125 | lib/src/migration/sqlite/inspect.rs:132-172 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.

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

Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:201 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:201-221 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:261-281 — `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 99 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.

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

Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:269 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:269-287 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:321-339 — `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 99 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:278 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:278-295 | conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:234-251 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:330-347 — before extracting anything, compare `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:230 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:230-242 | conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:188-200 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:295-307 — before extracting anything, compare `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs:385 — lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs:385-396 | lib/src/bigtable/rows.rs:426-437 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:217 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:217-226 | conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs:159-168 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:277-286 — before extracting anything, compare `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_memory.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) migration-cli/src/main.rs:320 — migration-cli/src/main.rs:320-328 | migration-cli/src/main.rs:337-345 | migration-cli/src/main.rs:364-372 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:258 — conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs:258-264 | conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs:313-318 — `conformance-runner/src/target_bigtable/execute.rs` and `conformance-runner/src/target_sqlite/execute.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 99 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) lib/src/bigtable/backend.rs:150 — lib/src/bigtable/backend.rs:150-157 | lib/src/memory/backend.rs:183-190 | lib/src/sqlite/backend.rs:96-103 — 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) lib/src/migration/bigtable/write.rs:35 — lib/src/migration/bigtable/write.rs:35-41 | lib/src/migration/sqlite/write.rs:185-191 | lib/src/migration/write.rs:109-115 — 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.

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

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:159 — lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs:159-171 | lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs:139-151 — before extracting anything, compare `lib/src/dynamodb/configuration.rs` and `lib/src/dynamodb/read_snapshot.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: event-store-adapter-rs — event-store-adapter-rs: abstractness 0.12, instability 0.00, distance 0.88 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

Minor — 53 finding(s)

M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×27

README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but `docs/spec/core-contract.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/sqlite.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/spanner.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/spanner.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/bigtable.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/bigtable.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:3 — conformance/README.md links to `../docs/spec/storage/hash.md`, but `docs/spec/storage/hash.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:54 — conformance/README.md names `tools/conformance/data.py`, but no file or folder `tools/conformance/data.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:264 — conformance/README.md names `tools/conformance/uv.lock`, but no file or folder `tools/conformance/uv.lock` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift conformance/README.md:285 — conformance/README.md names `tools/conformance/reference_model.py`, but no file or folder `tools/conformance/reference_model.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md:172 — docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md documents the environment variable `SQLITE_BUSY`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md:172 — docs/SQLITE_DATABASE_SCHEMA.ja.md documents the environment variable `SQLITE_LOCKED`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:10 — docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/spec/core-contract.md`, but no file or folder `docs/spec/core-contract.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:11 — docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md`, but no file or folder `docs/spec/storage/dynamodb.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:12 — docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/spec/storage/memory.md`, but no file or folder `docs/spec/storage/memory.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:13 — docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/plan/implementation-plan.md`, but no file or folder `docs/plan/implementation-plan.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:14 — docs/design/next-major.md names `docs/adr/`, but no file or folder `docs/adr` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:118 — docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_backend.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_backend.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:470 — docs/design/next-major.md names `dynamodb.md`, but no file or folder `dynamodb.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:652 — docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/types.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/types.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:652 — docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/key_resolver.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/key_resolver.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:686 — docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_for_memory.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_for_memory.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:808 — docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_for_dynamodb.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:1081 — docs/design/next-major.md names `lib/src/event_store_test_support.rs`, but no file or folder `lib/src/event_store_test_support.rs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/design/next-major.md:1448 — docs/design/next-major.md names `tools/spikes/dynamodb-emulators/README.md`, but no file or folder `tools/spikes/dynamodb-emulators/README.md` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
+ 2 more in this group — see findings.md.

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×17

Duplicated predicate REDACTED:5145 — `!request || !pendingRequests.delete(requestKey)` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, .claude/tools/aidlc-swarm.ts. 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 .claude/hooks/aidlc-review-freeze.ts:147 — `(ch === "|" || ch === "&") && command[i + 1] === ch` appears character-identically in 3 files — .claude/hooks/aidlc-review-freeze.ts, REDACTED, .claude/hooks/aidlc-state-transition-guard.ts. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-learnings.ts:1076 — `a.startsWith("--") && i + 1 < args.length` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-learnings.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-state.ts. 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 REDACTED:10064 — `args[i] === "--field" && i + 1 < args.length` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, .claude/tools/aidlc-state.ts. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-log.ts:438 — `autonomousDecision || humanPresenceGuardDisabled()` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-log.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-state.ts. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-sensor-claim-sources.ts:88 — `closing && closing[1][0] === fence.marker && closing[1].length >= fence.length` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-sensor-claim-sources.ts, REDACTED. 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 REDACTED:4224 — `entry.event === "WORKFLOW_STARTED" || entry.event === "STAGE_JUMPED"` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, .claude/tools/aidlc-log.ts. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-sensor-claim-sources.ts:1386 — `firedBase === "memory.md" || firedBase.endsWith("-questions.md") || firedBase.endsWith("-timestamp.md")` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-sensor-claim-sources.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-sensor-upstream-coverage.ts. 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 REDACTED:8868 — `process.env.AWS_AIDLC_DEFAULT_SCOPE || ""` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, REDACTED. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-audit.ts:1525 — `rawArgs[i] === "--project-dir" && i + 1 < rawArgs.length` appears character-identically in 5 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-audit.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-bolt.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-jump.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-log.ts. 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 REDACTED:4847 — `resolution.state === "ok" && resolution.unitKinds !== null` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, .claude/tools/aidlc-state.ts. 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 REDACTED:6493 — `stage.for_each !== "unit-of-work" || stage.mode !== "subagent"` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, .claude/tools/aidlc-state.ts. 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 .claude/hooks/aidlc-continue-workflow.ts:1132 — `typeof obj.transcript_path === "string" && obj.transcript_path.length > 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/hooks/aidlc-continue-workflow.ts, .claude/hooks/aidlc-fold-usage.ts. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-knowledge.ts:862 — `typeof parsed !== "object" || parsed === null || Array.isArray(parsed)` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-knowledge.ts, REDACTED. 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 REDACTED:3054 — `typeof parsed.name === "string" && parsed.name.trim()` appears character-identically in 2 files — REDACTED, .claude/tools/aidlc-runtime-paths.ts. 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 .claude/tools/aidlc-directive.ts:890 — `typeof v !== "number" || !Number.isInteger(v) || v < 1` appears character-identically in 2 files — .claude/tools/aidlc-directive.ts, .claude/tools/aidlc-stage-schema.ts. 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 lib/src/migration/legacy.rs:85 — `key.key_seq_nr != 0 && key.key_seq_nr != seq_nr` appears character-identically in 2 files — lib/src/migration/legacy.rs, lib/src/migration/sqlite/legacy.rs. 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.

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

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

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

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

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 2/3 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `migration-cli`.

P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No rollback/health safety · ×1

No rollback/health safety — Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

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

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

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-4c5c22c01d5e4dfeae605232efeb9f81/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-4c5c22c01d5e4dfeae605232efeb9f81/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	66	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm .	0	—
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	3	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 2 file(s) — `REDACTED`, `.claude/tools/aidlc-steering.ts` — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.	0	—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy	disclosure	—	disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm .	0	—

Run 01a16384-608c-7388-bf32-71052e2d8518 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 93% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Architecture · 89% · Strong ·

At a glance — Maturity · 47% · Weak · gated by M4 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 74% · Strong ·

At a glance — Security · 48% · Weak · gated by D29, D36 ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts