Executive summary
This system is a small, low-cost asset with a fragile operational foundation. While the underlying code structure is sound, the overall health score of 29% signals that the business is exposed to significant delivery and reliability risks. The primary concern is not the code’s complexity, but its lack of safety nets, which threatens the speed and stability of any future changes.
The value at stake is modest, with a rebuild cost of approximately €6,200. This low barrier to entry means the business is not locked into a legacy trap, but it also means there is little justification for leaving the system in its current precarious state. The codebase is small enough to be fixed quickly, yet large enough to require disciplined processes to prevent regression.
The most critical risk lies in operational readiness. With a score of 12%, the system lacks the testing and automation needed to ensure changes do not break existing functionality. This creates a high risk of defects reaching production, leading to costly outages and delayed feature releases. Without automated checks, every update becomes a manual gamble, eroding team confidence and slowing down delivery cycles.
Conversely, the architecture and security posture are strong. The code is well-structured and free from major security vulnerabilities, providing a solid foundation for improvement. This balance allows the team to focus on adding safety without needing to refactor the core logic. The genuine strength here is that the system is not broken; it is simply unprotected.
To maximize leverage, the immediate priority is to implement a continuous integration workflow that automatically builds and runs tests on every change. This single action establishes a safety net, enabling faster and safer development. By automating validation, the team can reduce defect rates and accelerate delivery, turning a fragile asset into a reliable one.
Raise Readiness 12 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 29 → ~44.
New since the last scan (6+)
- D3 · FileTooLong: plugin.cjs plugin.cjs
- D6 · Low cohesion: Carousel (LCOM4 5) src/js/free/components/carousel.js
- D6 · Low cohesion: Modal (LCOM4 4) src/js/free/components/modal.js
- D6 · Low cohesion: ScrollSpy (LCOM4 4) src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js
- R6 · No test, lint or typecheck script
- AC3 · Empty <h3> heading js/tw-elements.es.min.js
Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €2,100–€10,000
| Cost to rebuild | €2,100–€10,000 |
|---|---|
| Domain complexity | Standard |
| Quality factor | 0.7× (at 29% quality) |
| Size & shape | Small · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk) |
This codebase represents roughly ~0.1 person-years of build effort (about ~€6,200 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 12% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.
Top priorities
Diagnosis — what's actually going on
Architecture — module dependency matrix
| depends on → | 1 (global) | 2 src.js | 3 src.js.autoinit | 4 src.js.autoinit.Register | 5 src.js.autoinit.callbacks | 6 src.js.base-component | 7 src.js.dom | 8 src.js.free.forms.input | 9 src.js.free.methods.ripple | 10 src.js.util | 11 src.js.util.backdrop | 12 src.js.util.focusTrap | 13 src.js.util.scrollbar | 14 src.js.util.stack | 15 src.js.util.touch | 16 src.js.util.touch.swipe | 17 src.js.util.touch.touchUtil | 18 src.js.free.components.button | 19 src.js.free.components.carousel | 20 src.js.free.components.collapse | 21 src.js.free.components.dropdown | 22 src.js.free.components.modal | 23 src.js.free.components.offcanvas | 24 src.js.free.components.tooltip | 25 src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy | 26 src.js.free.navigation.tab | 27 src.js.free.components.popover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (global) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 src.js | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 src.js.autoinit | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 src.js.autoinit.Register | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 src.js.autoinit.callbacks | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 6 src.js.base-component | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 7 src.js.dom | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 8 src.js.free.forms.input | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 9 src.js.free.methods.ripple | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 10 src.js.util | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 11 src.js.util.backdrop | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12 src.js.util.focusTrap | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 src.js.util.scrollbar | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 14 src.js.util.stack | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 15 src.js.util.touch | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 16 src.js.util.touch.swipe | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 17 src.js.util.touch.touchUtil | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 18 src.js.free.components.button | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 19 src.js.free.components.carousel | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 20 src.js.free.components.collapse | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 21 src.js.free.components.dropdown | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 22 src.js.free.components.modal | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23 src.js.free.components.offcanvas | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 24 src.js.free.components.tooltip | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 25 src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 26 src.js.free.navigation.tab | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 27 src.js.free.components.popover | 1 |
18→6 src.js.free.components.button depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.button → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.button.Button→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.button uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.button, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
19→6 src.js.free.components.carousel depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.carousel → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.carousel.Carousel→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.carousel uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.carousel, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
20→6 src.js.free.components.collapse depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.collapse → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.collapse.Collapse→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.collapse uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.collapse, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
21→6 src.js.free.components.dropdown depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.dropdown → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.dropdown.Dropdown→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.dropdown uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.dropdown, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
22→6 src.js.free.components.modal depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.modal → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.modal.Modal→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.modal uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.modal, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
23→6 src.js.free.components.offcanvas depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.offcanvas → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.offcanvas.Offcanvas→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.offcanvas uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.offcanvas, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
24→6 src.js.free.components.tooltip depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.tooltip → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.tooltip.Tooltip→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.tooltip uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.components.tooltip, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
25→6 src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy.ScrollSpy→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.navigation.scrollspy, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
26→6 src.js.free.navigation.tab depends on src.js.base-component✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.navigation.tab → type in src.js.base-component) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.navigation.tab.Tab→src.js.base-component.BaseComponent
- Direction
- src.js.free.navigation.tab uses src.js.base-component. Changing src.js.base-component can break src.js.free.navigation.tab, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
27→24 src.js.free.components.popover depends on src.js.free.components.tooltip✕
- Type pairs
- 1 distinct (type in src.js.free.components.popover → type in src.js.free.components.tooltip) reference.
- Which types
src.js.free.components.popover.Popover→src.js.free.components.tooltip.Tooltip
- Direction
- src.js.free.components.popover uses src.js.free.components.tooltip. Changing src.js.free.components.tooltip can break src.js.free.components.popover, not the reverse.
- Position
- Below the diagonal — points down the layering, which is what you want.
At a glance — Code Health
At a glance — Architecture
At a glance — Maturity
At a glance — Readiness
At a glance — Security
At a glance — Accessibility
Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping
| OWASP category | Findings | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures | 6 | High / Critical |
| A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components | 2 | Medium |
Roadmap
First, establish a CI workflow that builds the project and runs tests on every push or pull request to ensure immediate feedback. Next, implement essential tooling by adding a test runner, linter, and type checking as scripts, and configure them to execute within the CI pipeline. Then, write tests for all unreached production modules to achieve full coverage and resolve the identified gaps in automated testing and test distribution.
| Do this | Helps | Effort | Dimension |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. | +14.1 pts | Low | Code Coverage |
| Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. | +14.1 pts | Low | Test Distribution |
| Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR. | +16.4 pts | Medium | CI/CD gates |
| Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry). | +16.4 pts | Medium | Test Coverage |
| Add a test runner (vitest / jest / playwright) and eslint and type checking (adopt TypeScript, or type-check the existing JavaScript with `checkJs`) as package.json scripts and run them in CI. | +16.4 pts | Medium | Tooling |
| Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release. | +14.1 pts | Medium | Release Hygiene |
| Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with plugin.cjs, tooltip.js, carousel.js. | +4.8 pts | Low | Knowledge Freshness |
| Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up. | +6.7 pts | Medium | Type Safety |
File quality
| File | Score | Band | Worst signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| src/js/free/components/tooltip.js | 7.1 | Mixed | Cyclomatic Complexity: Tooltip.show (cyclomatic 21) |
| src/js/free/components/dropdown.js | 7.2 | Mixed | Cyclomatic Complexity: Dropdown.clearMenus (cyclomatic 20) |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED |
| src/js/dom/event-handler.js | 8.5 | Near-clean | Cognitive Complexity: addHandler (cognitive 17) |
| plugin.cjs | 8.5 | Near-clean | God Classes: FileTooLong: plugin.cjs |
| src/js/free/components/carousel.js | 8.5 | Near-clean | Cohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: Carousel (LCOM4 5) |
| src/js/free/components/modal.js | 8.5 | Near-clean | Cohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: Modal (LCOM4 4) |
| src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js | 8.5 | Near-clean | Cohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: ScrollSpy (LCOM4 4) |
How the grades work
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.
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.
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions. Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
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. 43 of 47 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.7 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
What we checked — 47 dimensions across the health lenses
- 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, 99 of 117 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line.
- 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.
Tools & methods
| 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 | Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR | 1.86.0 · 0.69.3 | ✓ deterministic |
| LLM (sampled · advisory) | Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement | Local LLM | ◐ LLM · sampled · advisory |
Run transparency — what happened this run
- 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's package manifest is not parsed for licence data yet. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository's licenses are compliant (package.json), which this pass does not parse yet — so this dimension asserts nothing about this repository's 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. All 23 significant source file(s) were last meaningfully changed so long ago that no living knowledge remains — nothing since has been substantial enough to re-establish ownership (a broad, mechanical sweep that touches many files shallowly does not count, and neither does no activity at all). There is no concentration to measure, so the bus factor is not scored. This is not a clean bill: nobody currently holds working knowledge of this code (see D34 Knowledge Freshness). Counted over 23 of the 39 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
- D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (package.json), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
- D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — measured, with a gap in what it reached — 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. The scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (npm) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; REDACTED was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that REDACTED is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
- D43 Malicious Dependencies — measured, with a gap in what it reached — 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. The scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (npm) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; REDACTED was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that REDACTED is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
- 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.
- AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — 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. Subject: 3 markup document(s) — HTML, Razor, JSX, Vue, Svelte or server templates. The Runtime Evidence tier boots an app only via docker-compose, an Aspire AppHost, a Dockerfile, or an npm dev script. None was found, so no live runtime a11y/egress/header evidence was collected. You can widen what we reach: add a docker-compose.yml (or an Aspire AppHost) that brings the app up with its dependencies. Watchdog then boots it in an isolated sandbox and gathers real runtime evidence — you change nothing in your pipeline (no CI step, no SDK).
- C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
- C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
- C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
- C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
- ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
- 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and none applies: this repository publishes a library and deploys nothing (no container, IaC or deployment manifest), so it holds no runtime state of its own. Any data-access dependency it declares is the store it is a CLIENT for, not one it operates. The DR control belongs to whoever runs that data.
- X1 Async 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X12 Unreachable branch — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X13 Undrained process stream — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X14 Bypassable address classification — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X19 Unrestored process-global state — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X2 Cancellation propagation — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X20 Mistyped argument guard — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X22 Contradicted release guard — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — 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 Java and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded and no Java or Rust 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.
- X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — 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 Scala source only, and no C# was loaded and no Scala 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.
- X3 Exception handling — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — 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 Scala source only, and no C# was loaded and no Scala 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.
- X4 Structured logging — 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 implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
- 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, 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.
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
- 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.
- D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
- D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
- D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
- D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED 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.
- D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
- D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
- D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
- D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
- D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
- D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
- D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
- D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
- D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
- D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
- AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
- AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
- AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
- AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
- AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
- AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
- M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
- P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
The LLM boundary
Dimensions
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity
6 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was Tooltip.show at 21.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Tooltip.show (cyclomatic 21) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with tooltip.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 Dropdown.clearMenus (cyclomatic 20) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with dropdown.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 Dropdown.dataApiKeydownHandler (cyclomatic 17) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with dropdown.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cyclomatic Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity
8 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was Dropdown.clearMenus at 27.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Dropdown.clearMenus (cognitive 27) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with dropdown.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 show (cognitive 20) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with tooltip.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 addHandler (cognitive 17) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with event-handler.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cognitive Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
D3 · God Classes
4 god class(es) detected.
What to do
- Resolve the 2 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with plugin.cjs, tooltip.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with tooltip.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with tooltip.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate God Classes in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
D4 · Code Duplication
0 duplicated block group(s) detected.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)
3 of 15 classes have LCOM4 above 3.
What to do
- Resolve the 3 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with carousel.js, modal.js, scrollspy.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
- Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cohesion (LCOM4) in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
D8 · Code Coverage
No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
- Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Coverage in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
D9 · Test Distribution
No test suite found.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D13 · REDACTED Scanning
REDACTED scan ran and found no leaked secrets.
D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots
No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.
D19 · Documentation Quality
The TW Elements repository is well documented with a root README and an architecture/Docs markdown directory (both present). The root README gives an overview of the project, links to the live site, lists features, and points readers to the table of contents. It also includes a Community section directing users to GitHub discussions for feature requests. However, the repository's README is not the same as the root README; the README.txt file (9 words) under the repository root documents only the package itself with no installation or usage guidance, leaving the TW Elements Standard package's install and run steps missing from the visible content.
What to do
- Improve Documentation Quality — currently 6.0/10. — The TW Elements repository is well documented with a root README and an architecture/Docs markdown directory (both present). The root README gives an overview of the project, links to the live site, lists features, and points readers to the table of contents. It also includes a Community section directing users to GitHub discussions for feature requests. However, the repository's README is not the same as the root README; the README.txt file (9 words) under the repository root documents only the package itself with no installation or usage guidance, leaving the TW Elements Standard package's install and run steps missing from the visible content.
D21 · Naming Consistency
0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.
D26 · Project Cohesion
1 of 1 build units (npm) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D27 · Navigability
56 % of calls cross a namespace and 0 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.
D28 · Secrets (history)
5 finding(s): 0 critical, 5 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.
What to do
- Resolve the 5 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
- Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)
semgrep found no security issues.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities
No known-vulnerable dependencies in the 1 ecosystem(s) that were scanned (npm). Partial dependency scan: 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) were scanned (npm), and the findings above are real and complete for them. REDACTED was not scanned (REDACTED: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned), so this is not the whole dependency surface and the result is reported at reduced confidence.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness
23 of 23 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is plugin.cjs. Counted over 23 of the 39 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What to do
- Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with plugin.cjs, tooltip.js, carousel.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
- Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D35 · Change Coupling
No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.
D43 · Malicious Dependencies
No known-vulnerable dependencies in the 1 ecosystem(s) that were scanned (npm). Partial dependency scan: 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) were scanned (npm), and the findings above are real and complete for them. REDACTED was not scanned (REDACTED: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned), so this is not the whole dependency surface and the result is reported at reduced confidence.
Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions
AC1 · Text alternatives
AC2 · Forms & labels
AC3 · Page structure
- No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — index.html:2
- An empty heading appears in the document outline announced with no text. Give the heading text, or remove it if it's decorative. — js/tw-elements.es.min.js:3047
What to do
- Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC5 · ARIA correctness
AC7 · A11y enforcement
- No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (an a11y linter that can read your UI — no component framework was detected, so the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins would have nothing to lint; use an HTML-template a11y linter (html-eslint, htmlhint) or run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
What to do
- Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add an a11y linter that can read your UI — no component framework was detected, so the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins would have nothing to lint; use an HTML-template a11y linter (html-eslint, htmlhint) or run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
AX10 · Code composition
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.
AX3 · Project dependency cycles
AX4 · Dependency direction
M1 · Documentation (README)
- The root README is 9 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.
What to do
- Expand the README with getting-started, architecture overview and a project map.
- Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
- Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
- Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
M2 · Architecture documentation
- 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.
- No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
- Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
- Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure
What to do
- Start a test surface where your build system looks for one (tests/, test/, spec/, or your ecosystem's test source set) — the separation follows from putting the first tests in the right place.
M4 · Documentation accuracy
P1 · CI/CD gates
- No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
What to do
- Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
P10 · Library API & versioning
P3 · Security & performance tooling
- No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
- Run what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
- Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
- Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P6 · Release Hygiene
- No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
What to do
- Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
R1 · Type Safety
- 0 typed · 39 plain JS — the untyped files are plugin.cjs, src/js/autoinit/Register.js, src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js, src/js/autoinit/index.free.js, src/js/autoinit/index.js, src/js/autoinit/initSelectors/free.js (+33 more).
What to do
- Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
R10 · Code Duplication
- 6 duplicated blocks under src/js/free/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories components, forms, methods, navigation — 4 of them are reported below, and 2 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 6 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 6 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 6 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on. — src/js/free/forms/input.js:173
- src/js/util/sanitizer.js:59 · src/js/util/sanitizer.js:101 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and what repeats is a LIST OF ENTRIES rather than behaviour — the same entries written out more than once. Extract them into one shared, exported constant and spread that constant into each site, rather than into a function the sites call: a list like this often lives in declarative metadata (a decorator's options object, a static configuration table) that a build step must be able to read statically, where a function call is not allowed. Adding an entry to one copy and not the other is the failure this prevents. — src/js/util/sanitizer.js:59
- src/js/free/components/modal.js:53 · src/js/free/components/offcanvas.js:38 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 185 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/free/components/modal.js:53
- src/js/free/forms/input.js:261 · src/js/free/forms/input.js:338 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/js/free/forms/input.js:261
- src/js/free/components/carousel.js:278 · src/js/free/components/modal.js:386 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/js/free/components/carousel.js:278
- src/js/free/forms/input.js:173 · src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js:167 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 86 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/free/forms/input.js:173
- src/js/free/components/collapse.js:283 · src/js/free/forms/input.js:173 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 71 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/free/components/collapse.js:283
- src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:170 · src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:267 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 92 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:170
- src/js/free/forms/input.js:289 · src/js/free/forms/input.js:322 — 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. — src/js/free/forms/input.js:289
- src/js/autoinit/jqueryInit.js:3 · src/js/util/index.js:274 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/js/autoinit/jqueryInit.js:3
- src/js/dom/manipulator.js:34 · src/js/dom/manipulator.js:57 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 89 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/dom/manipulator.js:34
- src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:471 · src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js:392 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:471
- src/js/dom/event-handler.js:243 · src/js/dom/event-handler.js:316 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 53 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/dom/event-handler.js:243
- src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js:37 · src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js:140 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js:37
- src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:398 · src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:503 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:398
- src/js/free/components/popover.js:97 · src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:834 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — src/js/free/components/popover.js:97
- src/js/free/forms/input.js:597 · src/js/free/methods/ripple.js:445 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/js/free/forms/input.js:597
- src/js/util/touch/swipe.js:74 · src/js/util/touch/touchUtil.js:10 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — src/js/util/touch/swipe.js:74
- src/js/free/components/carousel.js:702 · src/js/free/components/carousel.js:721 — 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. — src/js/free/components/carousel.js:702
- src/js/free/components/collapse.js:357 · src/js/free/components/popover.js:99 · src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:836 — the 3 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. There is one copy in each of 3 separate files rather than several in one place, so check first whether these are sibling modules that each declare their own version of one shape — one per entity, per provider, per language. Where they are, no single extracted module collapses them: each module still has to be written, and what recurs is the TEMPLATE. The moves that do collapse a template are to generate these modules from the set they enumerate, or to replace the repeated construction with one factory each site calls with its own values — and where the set is the point, each module pinning one distinct thing, the repetition IS the enumeration and there is nothing to delete. — src/js/free/components/collapse.js:357
- src/js/free/components/collapse.js:194 · src/js/free/components/collapse.js:258 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 92 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/free/components/collapse.js:194
- src/js/free/components/collapse.js:202 · src/js/free/components/offcanvas.js:103 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 54 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/js/free/components/collapse.js:202
- src/js/dom/event-handler.js:397 · src/js/dom/event-handler.js:404 — 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. — src/js/dom/event-handler.js:397
What to do
- Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity
- clearMenus has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 27; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:487
- show has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:217
- dataApiKeydownHandler has cyclomatic complexity 17 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:545
- _slide has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/components/carousel.js:556
- _transitionComplete has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/navigation/tab.js:185
- _adjustDialog has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 8; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/components/modal.js:417
- addHandler has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/dom/event-handler.js:157
- _process has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js:217
- show has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/navigation/tab.js:68
- trigger has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/dom/event-handler.js:334
- _createRipple has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/methods/ripple.js:167
- _getDiameter has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/js/free/methods/ripple.js:302
What to do
- Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
R3 · Large Files
- 5 file(s) over 400 lines (counted as significant lines — blank lines excluded — over production source only, tests excluded), largest first: plugin.cjs (773), src/js/free/components/tooltip.js (700), src/js/free/components/carousel.js (629), src/js/free/forms/input.js (541), src/js/free/components/dropdown.js (503).
What to do
- Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
R4 · Test Coverage
- 0% of 39 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count
What to do
- Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
R6 · Tooling
- test ✗ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
What to do
- Add a test runner (vitest / jest / playwright) and eslint and type checking (adopt TypeScript, or type-check the existing JavaScript with `checkJs`) as package.json scripts and run them in CI.
R7 · Dead Code
- Unreachable from the 1 application, 1 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. This repository declares no build, type-check or test script, so nothing here would fail on a wrong deletion — confirm by hand that nothing loads each file (including by a path built at runtime) before removing it. An undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 3 in-repo import(s) from 3 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/components/popover.js, src/js/tw-elements.free.es.js, src/js/tw-elements.free.umd.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/free/components/tooltip.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make (×7) — plugin.cjs, src/js/util/stack.js, src/js/util/touch/index.js, …
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 2 in-repo import(s) from 2 other file(s) do name it (src/js/tw-elements.free.es.js, src/js/tw-elements.free.umd.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it (×12) — src/js/free/components/carousel.js, src/js/free/forms/input.js, src/js/free/components/dropdown.js, …
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 15 in-repo import(s) from 15 other file(s) do name it (src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js, src/js/base-component.js, src/js/free/components/carousel.js and 12 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/dom/event-handler.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 21 in-repo import(s) from 20 other file(s) do name it (src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js, src/js/autoinit/jqueryInit.js, src/js/base-component.js and 17 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/util/index.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/autoinit/initSelectors/free.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/components/tooltip.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/util/sanitizer.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 14 in-repo import(s) from 13 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/components/carousel.js, src/js/free/components/collapse.js, src/js/free/components/dropdown.js and 10 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/dom/manipulator.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 2 in-repo import(s) from 2 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/components/modal.js, src/js/free/components/offcanvas.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it (×4) — src/js/util/backdrop.js, src/js/util/focusTrap.js, src/js/util/scrollbar.js, …
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 16 in-repo import(s) from 16 other file(s) do name it (src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js, src/js/autoinit/index.js, src/js/free/components/carousel.js and 13 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/dom/selector-engine.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/autoinit/index.free.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it (×2) — src/js/autoinit/index.js, src/js/autoinit/initSelectors/free.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/util/touch/index.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/util/touch/swipe.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 9 in-repo import(s) from 9 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/components/button.js, src/js/free/components/carousel.js, src/js/free/components/collapse.js and 6 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/base-component.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 5 in-repo import(s) from 5 other file(s) do name it (src/js/base-component.js, src/js/free/components/collapse.js, src/js/free/components/tooltip.js and 2 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/dom/data.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/components/offcanvas.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/util/keycodes.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/free/methods/ripple.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/js/util/getStyle.js
- no import path from any entry point (1 application, 1 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/js/autoinit/index.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it (×2) — src/js/autoinit/Register.js, src/js/autoinit/jqueryInit.js
What to do
- Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.
R9 · Circular Imports
S1 · Web-Security Posture
- `https://cdn.tailwindcss.com/3.3.0` is executed by this page with no Subresource Integrity. Whoever can answer that request — the CDN, anyone who compromises it, anyone on the network path — runs arbitrary script in this page's origin, with its session. — index.html:17
What to do
- Pin third-party scripts and verify them: name an exact version in the URL and add an `integrity="sha384-…"` hash alongside `crossorigin="anonymous"` (both are required — an integrity hash on a cross-origin script without `crossorigin` is not evaluated, it blocks the script). Where the vendor ships a continuously-updated loader and publishes no stable hash (tag managers, analytics, chat widgets), Subresource Integrity is not available: constrain it instead with a `Content-Security-Policy` that names the exact origins allowed to execute, and drop the script from the pages that do not need it. Where the page is shipped inside a package that others host, prefer vendoring the asset and serving it from the app’s own origin, so no consumer inherits a third-party dependency they did not choose.
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped
X25 · Inert configuration knob
X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element
WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed
| Dimension | WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| AC1 · Text alternatives | 1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5 | Partial signal |
| AC2 · Forms & labels | 1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2 | Partial signal |
| AC3 · Page structure | 1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2 | Partial signal |
| AC5 · ARIA correctness | 4.1.2 | Partial signal |
| AC7 · A11y enforcement | enforcement — no page criterion | Enforcement posture (process) |
Reference — by lens
| Lens | Score | Rating | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Code Health | 33% | Weak — gated by R1, R7 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Architecture | 87% | Adequate — gated by D26 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Maturity | 36% | Weak — gated by D34, M1, M2 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Readiness | 12% | Critical — gated by D8, D9, R4, R6, P1, P3 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Security | 81% | Strong | Strongest area. |
| Accessibility | 66% | Adequate | Acceptable, with room to improve. |
Not evidenced — 5 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
- C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
- P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 78 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
- AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
- AC6 Visual & motion safety — No styled element found in the parsed markup — AC6 not applicable here.
- AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
- AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
- AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- AX6 Interface segregation — 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
- AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
- AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
- AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a TypeORM/MikroORM/sequelize-typescript/NestJS-Mongoose entity, a Mongoose schema, a Sequelize or Drizzle table, a Knex migration or a Prisma model — and no database or data-store client in the source either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect. If it does persist personal data (through a hosted backend configured outside this repository, for instance), the controls belong to wherever that data is stored.
- C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- D10 Test Quality — No tests were found in the analyzed repository to assess for quality.
- D11 Test Reliability — No test suite was found to re-run, so reliability couldn't be assessed. Two searches produced that zero and both came back empty: the classifier that reads the loaded workspace recognised no suite it could run, and a walk of the source on disk — which covers the JS/TS `*.test.*` and `*.spec.*` conventions and probes for a Pester suite — found no test source in any other ecosystem either. Neither search reaches a suite that is missing from the loaded workspace and carries no name either walk recognises, so this is 'no suite found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none.
- D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not applicable — this repository's 1 dependency manifest(s) (package.json) were read and declare no dependency, so there is no dependency whose hygiene could be assessed. This is a statement about what the repository declares, not an all-clear for dependencies it does not declare.
- D14 License Compliance — Package manifest not parsed for licence data — analyzer language-coverage gap
- D16 Bus Factor — dormant codebase — no living knowledge left to concentrate
- D17 Explicit Debt — explicit-debt markers are read through a C# workspace today, so they were not read for this repository's language — this asserts nothing about how many markers the code carries. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
- D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
- D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
- 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. 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
- D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
- D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
- D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
- D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
- D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
- D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
- D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this npm build ships 1 production module(s), so there is no coupling BETWEEN modules to measure. (Its test and non-production modules are not part of the shipped graph.)
- 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
- DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. 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 — no CI workflow found
- P2 Observability — This repository's JavaScript/TypeScript source (1 module(s), 39 file(s) read) declares no entry point and bootstraps no server, and nothing here deploys a service — it is a library, run inside whatever hosts it, so production observability (structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks) is N/A. If it grows a binary or a service, the dimension reactivates.
- P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript 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 — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) 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 tinybench, mitata, benchmark.js, benny or vitest `bench(...)` calls in files that import them (or `*.bench.*` files), or one of those in a package.json, 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: TypeScript/JavaScript runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
- PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
- R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
- R5 Dependency Freshness — no package-lock.json — dependency freshness not measured (would require an npm lockfile); JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
- R8 Dependency Hygiene — Not measured — no package.json declares any dependency, so there is nothing to check imports against (imports may resolve through a host runtime rather than node).
- X1 Async 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
- X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X2 Cancellation propagation — 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
- X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — Not applicable: this check looks for a collection written by a callback on one thread while the body waiting on it touches it on another, and in this repository's languages no collection is reachable from two threads at once. TypeScript/JavaScript runs every callback on the one thread that owns its objects: a callback runs only when the body waiting on it has yielded, never alongside it, and a worker thread receives a COPY of what it is sent. A SharedArrayBuffer carries raw bytes, never an Array, Map or Set, so no collection is reachable from two threads at once. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — 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
- X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — 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
- X3 Exception handling — 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
- X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — 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
- X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X4 Structured logging — 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
- 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)
Critical — 6 finding(s)
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- No automated tests
Serious — 97 finding(s)
- Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js:37
- Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:398
- Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/popover.js:97
- Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/forms/input.js:597
- Low cohesion: Carousel (LCOM4 5) src/js/free/components/carousel.js:119
- Low cohesion: Modal (LCOM4 4) src/js/free/components/modal.js:73
- Low cohesion: ScrollSpy (LCOM4 4) src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js:69
- FileTooLong: plugin.cjs plugin.cjs
- FileTooLong: components/tooltip.js src/js/free/components/tooltip.js
- Duplicated block with local edits (18 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/collapse.js:283
- Duplicated block with local edits (18 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:170
- Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) src/js/autoinit/jqueryInit.js:3
- Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:471
- Dead file (~88 LoC) src/js/autoinit/initSelectors/free.js
- Dead file (~88 LoC) src/js/util/touch/swipe.js
- Page without a main landmark index.html:2
- Empty <h3> heading js/tw-elements.es.min.js:3047
- Accessibility enforcement below the top rung
- Tooltip.show (cyclomatic 21) src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:217
- Dropdown.clearMenus (cyclomatic 20) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:487
- Dropdown.dataApiKeydownHandler (cyclomatic 17) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:545
- Dropdown.clearMenus (cognitive 27) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:487
- show (cognitive 20) src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:217
- addHandler (cognitive 17) src/js/dom/event-handler.js:157
- dataApiKeydownHandler (cognitive 17) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:545
- TooManyMethods: Tooltip src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:119
- ClassTooLong: Tooltip src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:119
- No CI pipeline
- Type Safety
- Duplication concentrated across 4 sibling directories (6 clone groups) src/js/free/forms/input.js:173
- Duplicated block (40 lines × 2 locations) src/js/util/sanitizer.js:59
- Duplicated block with local edits (37 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/modal.js:53
- Duplicated block (23 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/forms/input.js:261
- Duplicated block (22 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/carousel.js:278
- Duplicated block with local edits (19 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/forms/input.js:173
- Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/forms/input.js:289
- Duplicated block with local edits (15 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/dom/manipulator.js:34
- Duplicated block with local edits (14 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/dom/event-handler.js:243
- Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) src/js/util/touch/swipe.js:74
- Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/carousel.js:702
- Duplicated block (11 lines × 3 locations) src/js/free/components/collapse.js:357
- Duplicated block with local edits (11 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/collapse.js:194
- Duplicated block with local edits (10 matched lines × 2 locations) src/js/free/components/collapse.js:202
- Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) src/js/dom/event-handler.js:397
- Complex function clearMenus (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 27) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:487
- Complex function show (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 19) src/js/free/components/tooltip.js:217
- Complex function dataApiKeydownHandler (cyclomatic 17, cognitive 17) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js:545
- Complex function _slide (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 14) src/js/free/components/carousel.js:556
- Complex function _transitionComplete (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 15) src/js/free/navigation/tab.js:185
- Complex function _adjustDialog (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 8) src/js/free/components/modal.js:417
- Complex function addHandler (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 13) src/js/dom/event-handler.js:157
- Complex function _process (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 13) src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js:217
- Complex function show (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 13) src/js/free/navigation/tab.js:68
- Complex function trigger (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 11) src/js/dom/event-handler.js:334
- Complex function _createRipple (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) src/js/free/methods/ripple.js:167
- Complex function _getDiameter (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) src/js/free/methods/ripple.js:302
- Large Files
- Test Coverage
- No test, lint or typecheck script
- Dead file (~849 LoC) src/js/free/components/tooltip.js
- Dead file (~774 LoC) plugin.cjs
- Dead file (~765 LoC) src/js/free/components/carousel.js
- Dead file (~612 LoC) src/js/free/forms/input.js
- Dead file (~607 LoC) src/js/free/components/dropdown.js
- Dead file (~462 LoC) src/js/free/components/modal.js
- Dead file (~460 LoC) src/js/free/methods/ripple.js
- Dead file (~413 LoC) src/js/dom/event-handler.js
- Dead file (~409 LoC) src/js/free/navigation/scrollspy.js
- Dead file (~391 LoC) src/js/util/index.js
- Dead file (~370 LoC) src/js/free/components/collapse.js
- Dead file (~257 LoC) src/js/free/navigation/tab.js
- Dead file (~232 LoC) src/js/free/components/offcanvas.js
- Dead file (~194 LoC) src/js/autoinit/callbacks/free.js
- Dead file (~180 LoC) src/js/util/sanitizer.js
- Dead file (~176 LoC) src/js/dom/manipulator.js
- Dead file (~148 LoC) src/js/util/backdrop.js
- Dead file (~126 LoC) src/js/util/focusTrap.js
- Dead file (~112 LoC) src/js/free/components/popover.js
- Dead file (~109 LoC) src/js/util/stack.js
- Dead file (~108 LoC) src/js/util/scrollbar.js
- Dead file (~104 LoC) src/js/dom/selector-engine.js
- Dead file (~96 LoC) src/js/autoinit/index.js
- Dead file (~70 LoC) src/js/base-component.js
- Dead file (~60 LoC) src/js/dom/data.js
- Dead file (~51 LoC) src/js/util/touch/index.js
- Dead file (~49 LoC) src/js/free/components/button.js
- Dead file (~47 LoC) src/js/tw-elements.free.umd.js
- Dead file (~44 LoC) src/js/util/component-functions.js
- Dead file (~40 LoC) src/js/util/keycodes.js
- Dead file (~39 LoC) src/js/util/add-perfect-scrollbar-styles.js
- Dead file (~31 LoC) src/js/util/getStyle.js
- Dead file (~30 LoC) src/js/tw-elements.free.es.js
- Dead file (~24 LoC) src/js/util/touch/touchUtil.js
- Dead file (~21 LoC) src/js/autoinit/Register.js
- Dead file (~20 LoC) src/js/autoinit/jqueryInit.js
- Dead file (~7 LoC) src/js/autoinit/index.free.js
- Third-party script without Subresource Integrity index.html:17
Minor — 14 finding(s)
- Most significant orphaned file plugin.cjs
- Most significant orphaned file src/js/free/components/tooltip.js
- Most significant orphaned file src/js/free/components/carousel.js
- Projects may be oversized for their cohesion
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- Dormant codebase
- REDACTED
- No tests found
- Thin README
- No ADRs
- No architecture diagram/doc
- No SAST
- No changelog
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
| 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-ed44980d57ec4c64974191a3794d52c0/history.json --exit-code 0 --source . | 5 | 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-ed44980d57ec4c64974191a3794d52c0/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 . | 0 | artifacts/raw/semgrep.json |
| D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities | osv-scanner | — | osv-scanner --format json --recursive . | 0 | — |
| D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities | trivy | — | trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update | 0 | artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json |
| D31 · IaC & Container Security | trivy | — | trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan. | 0 | — |
| D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) | semgrep | — | semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. | 0 | — |
| D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing | provenance | — | provenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for. | 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 . | 0 | — |
| D43 · Malicious Dependencies | trivy | — | trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update | 0 | artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json |