Public report of mehdihadeli/vertical-slice-api-template, published 22 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive report Measured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey → Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 22 October 2026, 03:01 UTC · Survey ID cd_e70661d54f3f4cefb9cc6dbf327b31cb

mehdihadeli/vertical-slice-api-template

Measured 22 October 2026, 02:40 UTC, at code version be0da19

Test reliability: not measured

Test reliability is not measured: No test run produced results.

CAI score 55out of 100 At risk Down 1 since the last survey

The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.

Architecture 81 Strong Maturity 77 Exemplary Performance 74 Strong Event-Driven 68 Strong Domain Modelling 67 Adequate Code Health 58 Adequate Production Readiness 51 Adequate Security and Compliance 50 Adequate

A small codebase: 11,123 lines of product code in 15 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.2 person-years · Weakest lens: Security and Compliance, 50

Findings by how serious they are

184 critical 609 serious 239 minor

2 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
22 October 2026, 02:40 UTC

A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.

A critical security finding is open, such as a library with a known critical vulnerability or a password or key found in the code. The score itself is unchanged, but its band shows At risk until the finding is fixed. See the Security and Compliance lens.

The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸

96of 102 dimensions measured by tools. The other 6 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
936of 1032 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 96 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
102dimensions across 8 lenses, read from 11,123 lines of product code in 15 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

mehdihadeli/vertical-slice-api-template scores 55 out of 100, but it is rated At risk while a critical security finding is open; the score itself is unchanged. Watchdog judged it as a template, sample or demo, meant to be read or copied, so the dimensions about building, releasing and running a product don't apply, and its lenses are rated against a lower bar. The score itself is worked out as for any repository.

The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Security and Compliance, which scores 50 and is rated Adequate. Its IaC & Container Security dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Security and Compliance can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene and to resolve the 2 Prerelease dependency finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene, and if Security and Compliance rose to 70, the score would rise from 55 to about 58.

184 findings are critical: 126 in Explicit Debt, 27 in IaC & Container Security, 17 in Static Analysis (SAST), eight in Dependency Vulnerabilities, three in Test Quality, one in Dependency Hygiene, one in Outbox / dual-write and one in Project dependency cycles.

Watchdog couldn't measure Runtime accessibility in this code, so that dimension is left out of the score. The product code is 11,123 lines, which would take an estimated 0.2 person-years, around €32,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 58 Adequate, capped by Explicit Debt Architecture 81 Strong Maturity 77 ★ Exemplary Production Readiness 51 Adequate, capped by Dependency Hygiene and Domain vs controller coverage Security and Compliance 50 Adequate, capped by Static Analysis (SAST), Dependency Vulnerabilities, IaC & Container Security and Access Controls Domain Modelling 67 Adequate, capped by Strongly-typed ids and Rich vs anemic model Event-Driven 68 Strong Performance 74 Strong

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

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Security and Compliance 50 · counts for 45%Production Readiness 51 · counts for 25%Code Health 58 · counts for 14%Domain Modelling 67 · counts for 8%Event-Driven 68 · counts for 4%Performance 74 · counts for 2%Maturity 77 · counts for 1%Architecture 81 · counts for 1%

If Security and Compliance rose from 50 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 55 to about 58.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Business logic 19%Supporting code 49%Tests 31%Generated by tools 1%
New since the last survey: 181 findings

These 181 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026. The first 100 are listed here, and the findings file in the download package lists them all.

  • Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsService.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsService.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsWriter.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsWriter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareImp.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareImp.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/InternalHttpProblemResult.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/InternalHttpProblemResult.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/NotFoundHttpProblemResult.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/NotFoundHttpProblemResult.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/UnAuthorizedHttpProblemResult.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/UnAuthorizedHttpProblemResult.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/EndpointConventionBuilderExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/EndpointConventionBuilderExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/MinimalApiExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/MinimalApiExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/ModuleExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/ModuleExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/TypedResultsExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/TypedResultsExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CompressionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CompressionExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CorsExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CorsExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/ValidationError.cs src/Shared/Validation/ValidationError.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/ValidationResultModel.cs src/Shared/Validation/ValidationResultModel.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/Extensions/ValidatorExtension.cs src/Shared/Validation/Extensions/ValidatorExtension.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/RateLimit/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/RateLimit/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/CorrelationIdHeaderOperationFilter.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/CorrelationIdHeaderOperationFilter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/EnumSchemaFilter.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/EnumSchemaFilter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/Extensions/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/Extensions/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/Extensions/WebApplicationExtensions.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/Extensions/WebApplicationExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/CorrelationIdHeaderOperationTransformer.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/CorrelationIdHeaderOperationTransformer.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/EnumSchemaTransformer.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/EnumSchemaTransformer.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/SecuritySchemeDocumentTransformer.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/SecuritySchemeDocumentTransformer.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/Extensions/WebApplicationExtensions.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/Extensions/WebApplicationExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Messaging.Wolverine/WolverineExternalEventBus.cs src/Shared/Messaging.Wolverine/WolverineExternalEventBus.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Logging/LoggingBehavior.cs src/Shared/Logging/LoggingBehavior.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Logging/Extensions/HttpContextExtensions.cs src/Shared/Logging/Extensions/HttpContextExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/HealthCheck/WebApplicationExtensions.cs src/Shared/HealthCheck/WebApplicationExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/DbContextDesignFactoryBase.cs src/Shared/EF/DbContextDesignFactoryBase.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/EfDbContextBase.cs src/Shared/EF/EfDbContextBase.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/EfTxBehavior.cs src/Shared/EF/EfTxBehavior.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/NpgsqlConnectionFactory.cs src/Shared/EF/NpgsqlConnectionFactory.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/SqlKataExtensions.cs src/Shared/EF/SqlKataExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/StronglyTypedIdValueConverterSelector.cs src/Shared/EF/StronglyTypedIdValueConverterSelector.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/AuditInterceptor.cs src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/AuditInterceptor.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/SoftDeleteInterceptor.cs src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/SoftDeleteInterceptor.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/Extensions/DbContextExtensions.cs src/Shared/EF/Extensions/DbContextExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/Converters/AggregateIdValueConverter.cs src/Shared/EF/Converters/AggregateIdValueConverter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/Converters/EntityIdValurConverter.cs src/Shared/EF/Converters/EntityIdValurConverter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/ActivityExtensions.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/ActivityExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/PropagationContextJsonConverter.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/PropagationContextJsonConverter.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/TagsExtensions.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/TagsExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/TelemetryPropagator.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/TelemetryPropagator.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/Behaviors/ObservabilityPipelineBehavior.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/Behaviors/ObservabilityPipelineBehavior.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Reflection/ReflectionUtilities.cs src/Shared/Core/Reflection/ReflectionUtilities.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Persistence/DataSeederManager.cs src/Shared/Core/Persistence/DataSeederManager.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Persistence/DataSeedWorker.cs src/Shared/Core/Persistence/DataSeedWorker.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Persistence/MigrationManager.cs src/Shared/Core/Persistence/MigrationManager.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Persistence/MigrationWorker.cs src/Shared/Core/Persistence/MigrationWorker.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Extensions/ValidationExtensions.cs src/Shared/Core/Extensions/ValidationExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Extensions/ServiceCollectionsExtensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions.Dependency.cs src/Shared/Core/Extensions/ServiceCollectionsExtensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions.Dependency.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Extensions/ServiceCollectionsExtensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions.Options.cs src/Shared/Core/Extensions/ServiceCollectionsExtensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions.Options.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Exceptions/BusinessRuleValidationException.cs src/Shared/Core/Exceptions/BusinessRuleValidationException.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/Aggregate.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/Aggregate.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/AggregateFactory.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/AggregateFactory.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/AggregateId.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/AggregateId.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/EntityId.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/EntityId.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/AggregateDomainEventsStore.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/AggregateDomainEventsStore.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/DomainEvent.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/DomainEvent.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/DomainEventPublisher.cs src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/DomainEventPublisher.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/CacheKey.cs src/Shared/Cache/CacheKey.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/CacheQuery.cs src/Shared/Cache/CacheQuery.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/CacheRequest.cs src/Shared/Cache/CacheRequest.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/CacheService.cs src/Shared/Cache/CacheService.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Cache/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/Serializers/MessagePack/MessagePackHybridCacheSerializer.cs src/Shared/Cache/Serializers/MessagePack/MessagePackHybridCacheSerializer.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/Serializers/MessagePack/MessagePackHybridCacheSerializerFactory.cs src/Shared/Cache/Serializers/MessagePack/MessagePackHybridCacheSerializerFactory.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/Behaviors/CachingBehavior.cs src/Shared/Cache/Behaviors/CachingBehavior.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/Behaviors/InvalidateCachingBehavior.cs src/Shared/Cache/Behaviors/InvalidateCachingBehavior.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Domain/Identity.cs src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Domain/Identity.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/ConcurrencyInterceptor.cs src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/ConcurrencyInterceptor.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/Shared/Diagnostics/TelemetryTags.cs src/Shared/Diagnostics/TelemetryTags.cs
  • Code Coverage · Low coverage: src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/CatalogsConfigurations.cs src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/CatalogsConfigurations.cs

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

Fixed since the last survey: 76 findings

These 76 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

  • Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) src/Shared/Observability/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Shared/Observability/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Shared/Observability/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (38 lines × 2) src/Shared/Observability/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (28–29 lines × 3) src/Shared/Observability/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 3) src/Shared/Observability/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 3) src/Shared/Observability/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) src/Shared/Observability/DiagnosticsProvider.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 5) src/Shared/Observability/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) src/Shared/Observability/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs
  • Test Quality · No assertions (empty test): category_trait_test tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs
  • Test Quality · No assertions (empty test): feature_trait_test tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs
  • Test Quality · No assertions (empty test): bug_trait_test tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs
  • Test Quality · No assertions: validate_service_dependencies tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests/DependencyTests.cs
  • Test Quality · Test project verifies nothing: Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests/DependencyTests.cs
  • Test Quality · Test project verifies nothing: Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs
  • Dependency Hygiene · Vulnerable: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.OpenTelemetryProtocol
  • Dependency Hygiene · Vulnerable: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Zipkin
  • Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit
  • Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: Microsoft.Extensions.ServiceDiscovery
  • Dependency Hygiene · Prerelease dependency: Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Hybrid
  • Dependency Hygiene · Prerelease dependency: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Prometheus.AspNetCore
  • Dependency Hygiene · Prerelease dependency: OpenTelemetry.Instrumentation.GrpcNetClient
  • Dependency Hygiene · Prerelease dependency: OpenTelemetry.Instrumentation.Process
  • Explicit Debt · BareSuppressMessage tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.UnitTests/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProductTests.cs
  • Explicit Debt · Dead code: CatalogsTestDataSeeder tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.IntegrationTests/CatalogsTestDataSeeder.cs
  • Explicit Debt · Dead code: CatalogsTestDataSeeder tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.ContractTests/CatalogsTestDataSeeder.cs
  • Explicit Debt · Dead code: CatalogsTestDataSeeder tests/Vertical.Slice.Template.ClientsTests/CatalogsTestDataSeeder.cs
  • Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetImplementedInterfacesToMap src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs
  • Explicit Debt · Dead code: IsPrimitive src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs
  • Explicit Debt · Dead code: IsRecord src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: watchdog-unpinned-package-install-in-run .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: watchdog-mutable-docker-action-tag REDACTED
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: watchdog-unpinned-package-install-in-run .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: watchdog-unpinned-package-install-in-run .github/workflows/publish.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/release-drafter.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · High: REDACTED .github/workflows/release-drafter.yml
  • Static Analysis (SAST) · Medium: REDACTED .github/workflows/build-test.yml
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE: System.Drawing.Common 4.7.0
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: SQLitePCLRaw.lib.e_sqlite3 2.1.10
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: System.Formats.Asn1 5.0.0
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.OpenTelemetryProtocol 1.10.0
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Zipkin 1.10.0
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE: [GHSA redacted] package-lock.json
  • IaC & Container Security · High IaC: DS-0002 REDACTED
  • IaC & Container Security · High IaC: DS-0002 REDACTED
  • IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC: REDACTED REDACTED
  • IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC: REDACTED REDACTED
  • IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC: REDACTED REDACTED
  • IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs
  • Stateful singletons · Stateful singleton: DiagnosticsProvider src/Shared/Observability/DiagnosticsProvider.cs
Rebuild cost: about €32,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€11,000 to €54,000, for 176 to 563 hours of work, about 0.2 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problemVery high, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor×0.8 at a score of 55. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
SizeSmall: 11,123 lines of product code, of which 43% is declarations and boilerplate, 29% straight logic and 28% logic with branches
Comment linesThe estimate prices 9,885 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 11,123 lines but aren't priced as work.

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

Top priorities

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

1
Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.
Raises the score by about 3 points · Low effort · Dependency Hygiene
2
Resolve the 2 Prerelease dependency finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.
Raises the score by about 3 points · Low effort · Dependency Hygiene
3
Resolve the 6 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED, REDACTED.
Raises the score by about 2 points · Low effort · Dependency Vulnerabilities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

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

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €32,000 to build again, about 0.2 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Security and Compliance, at 50 (Adequate). Security and Compliance is about how well the product is protected, and how it handles personal data. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Security and Compliance also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Security and Compliance grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Security and Compliance actions in Top priorities.
One cause behind 6 Domain Modelling findings · Common cause
6 findings in the Domain Modelling lens come from the same cause. The code models the business as objects, such as an order or a customer, and each object should guard its own rules: an order, for example, should refuse to be shipped before it has been paid. Here the objects don't do that. Some objects only hold data, while the rules that should keep that data valid sit elsewhere in the code. Identifiers, such as order numbers and customer numbers, are passed around as plain numbers or text, so nothing stops the code from using one kind where another belongs. Because all of these findings have the same cause, fixing it once, in the business objects themselves, deals with them together.
Based on: Rich vs anemic model (1 finding) · Strongly-typed ids (5 findings)
What to do: Give each business object the methods that enforce its rules, such as a method for shipping an order that first checks it has been paid, and let only those methods change its data. Give each kind of identifier a type of its own, so an order number can't be used where a customer number belongs.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 3 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Dependency Hygiene findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

arch Shared Shared Vertical.Slice.Template Template Vertical.Slice.Template->Shared Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients ConnectedServiceClients Vertical.Slice.Template->Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients KiotaClients Vertical.Slice.Template->Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients Vertical.Slice.Template.Api Api Vertical.Slice.Template.Api->Vertical.Slice.Template Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults ServiceDefaults Vertical.Slice.Template.Api->Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost AppHost Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost->Vertical.Slice.Template.Api Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost->Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

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

80 modules, with 81 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 2 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

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

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Messaging2 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Paging3 Shared.Abstractions.Observability4 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence5 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef.Repository6 Shared.Abstractions.Web7 Shared.OpenApi8 Shared.Resiliency.Options9 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Dtos.v110 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Models11 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.ReadModel12 Shared.Abstractions.Core.CQRS13 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events14 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef15 Shared.Core.Extensions16 Shared.Core.Messaging17 Shared.Core.Persistence18 Shared.Core.Persistence.Ef19 Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Commands20 Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Query21 Shared.Abstractions.Caching22 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain23 Shared.Core.Domain.Events24 Shared.Core.Paging25 Shared.Diagnostics.Behaviors26 Shared.EF27 Shared.Cache28 Shared.Cache.Behaviors29 Shared.Core.Domain30 Shared.Core.Exceptions31 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductsByPage.v132 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Dtos33 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Data34 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.CreatingProduct.v135 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductById.v136 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients37 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products38 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.ConnectedService39 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Kiota40 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Rest
1 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Messaging
2 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Paging
3 Shared.Abstractions.Observability
4 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence
5 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef.Repository
6 Shared.Abstractions.Web
7 Shared.OpenApi
8 Shared.Resiliency.Options
9 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Dtos.v1
10 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Models
11 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.ReadModel
12 Shared.Abstractions.Core.CQRS1
13 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events1
14 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef1
15 Shared.Core.Extensions2
16 Shared.Core.Messaging2
17 Shared.Core.Persistence4
18 Shared.Core.Persistence.Ef2
19 Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Commands2
20 Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Query2
21 Shared.Abstractions.Caching1
22 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain1
23 Shared.Core.Domain.Events11
24 Shared.Core.Paging21
25 Shared.Diagnostics.Behaviors22
26 Shared.EF43
27 Shared.Cache7
28 Shared.Cache.Behaviors4
29 Shared.Core.Domain17
30 Shared.Core.Exceptions1
31 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductsByPage.v13121112
32 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Dtos2
33 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Data2112
34 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.CreatingProduct.v1112111
35 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductById.v1121111
36 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients112
37 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products1114144
38 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.ConnectedService11121
39 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Kiota11121
40 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Rest11121
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Messaging2 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Paging3 Shared.Abstractions.Observability4 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence5 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef.Repository6 Shared.Abstractions.Web7 Shared.OpenApi8 Shared.Resiliency.Options9 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Dtos.v110 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Models11 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.ReadModel12 Shared.Abstractions.Core.CQRS13 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events14 Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef15 Shared.Core.Extensions16 Shared.Core.Messaging17 Shared.Core.Persistence18 Shared.Core.Persistence.Ef19 Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Commands20 Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Query21 Shared.Abstractions.Caching22 Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain23 Shared.Core.Domain.Events24 Shared.Core.Paging25 Shared.Diagnostics.Behaviors26 Shared.EF27 Shared.Cache28 Shared.Cache.Behaviors29 Shared.Core.Domain30 Shared.Core.Exceptions31 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductsByPage.v132 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Dtos33 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Data34 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.CreatingProduct.v135 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductById.v136 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients37 Vertical.Slice.Template.Products38 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.ConnectedService39 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Kiota40 Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.RestShared.Abstractions.Core.Messaging1Shared.Abstractions.Core.Paging2Shared.Abstractions.Observability3Shared.Abstractions.Persistence4Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef.Repository5Shared.Abstractions.Web6Shared.OpenApi7Shared.Resiliency.Options8Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Dtos.v19Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Models10Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.ReadModel11Shared.Abstractions.Core.CQRS12Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events13Shared.Abstractions.Persistence.Ef14Shared.Core.Extensions15Shared.Core.Messaging16Shared.Core.Persistence17Shared.Core.Persistence.Ef18Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Commands19Shared.Diagnostics.CoreDiagnostics.Query20Shared.Abstractions.Caching21Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain22Shared.Core.Domain.Events23Shared.Core.Paging24Shared.Diagnostics.Behaviors25Shared.EF26Shared.Cache27Shared.Cache.Behaviors28Shared.Core.Domain29Shared.Core.Exceptions30Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductsByPage.v131Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Dtos32Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Data33Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.CreatingProduct.v134Vertical.Slice.Template.Products.Features.GettingProductById.v135Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients36Vertical.Slice.Template.Products37Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.ConnectedService38Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Kiota39Vertical.Slice.Template.Shared.Clients.Rest401112242221111212243741713121112221121121111211111121114144111211112111121+40 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 58% · Adequate · gated by D17 ·

The Good
D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 10.0 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 9.0 D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 10.0 D4 · .NET / C# Code Duplication 9.5 D18 · .NET / C# Solution Shape 10.0 D39 · .NET / C# IL Efficiency 10.0 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 8.9 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 8.5 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 10.0 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 8.8
The Bad
X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 5.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 4.5 X3 · Repo Exception handling 5.4
The Ugly
D17 · .NET / C# Explicit Debt 0.0 X32 · Repo Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly 2.7

At a glance — Architecture · 81% · Strong ·

The Good
D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 10.0 D6 · .NET / C# Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · .NET / C# Project Cohesion 8.7 D27 · .NET / C# Navigability 8.0 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX1 · Repo Captive dependencies 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 7.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 AX7 · Repo Slice cohesion 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0
The Bad
AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 5.5

At a glance — Maturity · 77% · Exemplary ·

The Good
D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · .NET / C# Documentation Quality 7.0 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 9.0 D24 · .NET / C# Comment Value 9.0 D34 · .NET / C# Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 8.1 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0
The Bad
M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 5.0

At a glance — Readiness · 51% · Adequate · gated by D12, P9 ·

The Good
D9 · .NET / C# Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · .NET / C# Test Quality 8.1 D13 · .NET / C# Secret Scanning 10.0 D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 ED5 · Repo Idempotency 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 8.2 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 8.0 P5 · Repo DR & Backup 7.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0 P7 · Repo Outbound HTTP resilience 10.0 P8 · Repo Schema migrations 10.0
The Bad
D8 · .NET / C# Code Coverage 4.5 D12 · .NET / C# Dependency Hygiene 3.9 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 4.0
The Ugly
P9 · Repo Domain vs controller coverage 2.0

At a glance — Security · 50% · Adequate · gated by D29, D30, D31, C2 ·

The Good
D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 10.0 D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 10.0 C3 · Repo Audit Trail 7.5 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0
The Bad
D40 · .NET / C# Network Egress Confinement 6.0 D41 · .NET / C# Kernel & Syscall Confinement 6.0 C4 · Repo Data Retention 6.5 S1 · Repo Web-Security Posture 6.0
The Ugly
D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 0.2 D30 · .NET / C# Dependency Vulnerabilities 3.8 D31 · .NET / C# IaC & Container Security 0.0 C2 · Repo Access Controls 3.0

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 67% · Adequate · gated by DM2, DM4 ·

The Good
DM1 · Repo Aggregate boundaries 10.0 DM10 · Repo One transaction, one aggregate 10.0 DM11 · Repo Constructible invalid state 10.0 DM12 · Repo Ambient inputs in the domain 10.0 DM3 · Repo Integration-event coupling 10.0 DM5 · Repo Encapsulated state 10.0 DM6 · Repo Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary 10.0 DM8 · Repo Value-object opportunities 10.0 DM9 · Repo Scattered domain decisions 10.0
The Ugly
DM2 · Repo Strongly-typed ids 3.0 DM4 · Repo Rich vs anemic model 3.0

At a glance — Event-Driven · 68% · Strong ·

The Good
ED1 · Repo Handler temporal coupling 10.0 ED3 · Repo Event naming 10.0
The Bad
ED4 · Repo Outbox / dual-write 4.3

At a glance — Performance · 74% · Strong ·

The Good
PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 6.0 PF2 · Repo Allocation hygiene 7.2 PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration524High / Critical
A05:2025 — Injection40High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures8High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by resolving the single vulnerable dependency and the two prerelease dependencies to secure the supply chain. Next, enforce authorization at every handler by implementing guard methods or adopting the [Authorize] attribute to ensure protected-by-default behavior. Address the 106 low code coverage findings, prioritizing DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs, WebApplicationExtensions.cs, and DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs. Finally, remediate the 410 medium infrastructure-as-code issues, starting with REDACTED, REDACTED, and REDACTED.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.+3.0 ptsLowDependency Hygiene
Resolve the 2 Prerelease dependency finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.+2.8 ptsLowDependency Hygiene
Resolve the 6 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED, REDACTED.+1.9 ptsLowDependency Vulnerabilities
Resolve the 1 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with REDACTED.+1.8 ptsLowDependency Hygiene
Resolve the 1 No network policy finding(s) in Network Egress Confinement.+1.7 ptsLowNetwork Egress Confinement
Resolve the 3 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with Tests.cs (3).+1.6 ptsLowTest Quality
Resolve the 3 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with QueryCollectionExtensions.cs (2), HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs.+1.6 ptsLowExplicit Debt
Resolve the 4 NoWarnInCsproj finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with Directory.Build.props (4).+1.6 ptsLowExplicit Debt

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 151 files carrying findings, judged against the Template bar: 11% slop · 10% mixed · 79% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED0.7SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
.editorconfig1.0SlopExplicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.6SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED1.8SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED2.5MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.4MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.6MixedDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED

How the grades work

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

Critical — 184

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

Serious — 609

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

Minor — 239

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

Could not be resolved — 2

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. 96 of 102 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 6 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 102 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D8D9D10D12D13D14D15D17D18D19D21D24D26D27D28D29D30D31D34D35D39D40D41D44AX1AX10AX2AX3AX4AX5AX6AX7AX8AX9C2C3C4DM1DM10DM11DM12DM2DM3DM4DM5DM6DM8DM9ED1ED3ED4ED5GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P5P6P7P8P9PF1PF2PF3S1X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X32X4X5

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions
  1. 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, 936 of 1032 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. 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.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a1617a-ec52-7def-b8d7-96fefe704366.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

  • D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test reliability NOT MEASURED: the test run produced no results for any test tier, so no test ever ran and flakiness could not be exercised. The cause could not be attributed, so it is excluded from the score rather than read as an absence of tests.
  • D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable (1 contributor(s) across 140 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). Concentration needs a team to concentrate: with one contributor there is nobody to spread the knowledge to, so there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
  • D17 Explicit Debt — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The C# workspace loaded this repository's projects but reported a load failure, and the dead-code reference search is unreliable over a graph that did not load cleanly, so it was skipped. The other debt markers on this row were read; dead symbols were not, and their absence from the score is not a finding that the code has none. First load diagnostic: Failure: Msbuild failed when processing the file 'tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests/Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests.csproj' with message: Shared depends on Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Hybrid (>= 10.0.4) but Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Hybrid 10.0.4 was not found. Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Hybrid 10.1.0 was ….
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — 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. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. REDACTED carries no `FROM` instruction, so it declares no build stage and every REDACTED rule this engine owns — the runtime-hardening, key-material, mutable-clone, no-op-shim, build-context, trust-anchor, install-guard, setuid and world-writable-path rules — is outside its own premise there and returned nothing. That silence is deliberate and correct: with no base image there is no image to reason about. It is reported here because it is NOT the same fact as a clean file, and coverage is stated as 36 of 37 Infrastructure-as-Code manifest(s) fully judged rather than as 100%. The vendor scanners (trivy, checkov) do read these files and their findings above stand; only this engine's own stage-keyed rules are absent. No owner action: a build file with no FROM is a legitimate include fragment.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/Item/ProductsItemRequestBuilder.cs`, `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/ProductsRequestBuilder.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/CatalogsApiMetadata.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/GettingProductById/v1/GetProductById.cs`, … (+59 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via AspireAppHost (src/Aspire/Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost/Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost.csproj). the Aspire AppHost did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time (or only the dashboard) — no runtime evidence.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • 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.
  • D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
  • 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.
  • D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
  • 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.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement: Egress confinement is read from committed Kubernetes manifests — a policy applied out-of-band (cluster-default deny, a service mesh, or a cloud firewall/security group off-repo) is invisible, and a present NetworkPolicy is declared config, not proof the cluster admission-controller actually enforces it at runtime.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement: Syscall/MAC confinement is read from committed manifests — a profile applied by a cluster-wide PodSecurity default or a mutating webhook off-repo isn't seen, and a declared seccomp/AppArmor profile is config presence, not proof the node's kernel actually loaded and enforced it.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
  • C3 Audit Trail: This control is scored from in-repo evidence only — a working control configured outside the repository leaves no signal a static scan can credit.
  • C4 Data Retention: This control is scored from in-repo evidence only — its real-world effectiveness, exercised only at runtime, is outside a static scan.
  • DM4 Rich vs anemic model: Behaviour is detected as state mutation inside a method body — a method that enforces an invariant by validating-and-throwing without mutating reads as a query, and mutation delegated through an interface the scan can't resolve isn't credited; entities with zero public properties still drop out of the population. It detects that state changes, not whether the rule is correct.
  • DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
  • ED5 Idempotency: Idempotency is judged from the handler body's visible writes and guards — a guard enforced by a database unique constraint, a broker's exactly-once delivery, or a domain method whose no-op-when-applied logic the scan can't follow may read as at-risk; the at-risk candidates are confirmed by a SAMPLED LLM verdict (advisory, not exhaustive) and degrade to heuristic-only when no model is configured. It flags the at-least-once double-apply SHAPE, not a runtime proof of a duplicate effect.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (6): D19, D21, D24, D26, ED5, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity9.0 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

3 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient at 30.

TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30)src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:596
OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26)src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs:41
ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26)src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs:49

What to do

  1. Bring the 3 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30), OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26), ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 3 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 9.0 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
  2. Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D3 · God Classes10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 god class(es) detected.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md.

D4 · Code Duplication9.5 / 10Stronggated by 16 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

14 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 2 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.

Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) · ×2src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:53
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:61
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens)src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:13
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens)src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs:13
Duplicated block (66 lines × 2)src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs:43

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with CommandHandlerMetrics.cs, QueryHandlerMetrics.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with DiagnosticsProvider.cs, QueryableExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with CommandHandlerActivity.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D5 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

15 projects, 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on project(s).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 23 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

D8 · Code Coverage4.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How much of the code is actually exercised by tests.

Method: Coverage from coverlet runs or committed reports (Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov), computed per-file with structured exclusions for generated, trivial, and glue code. When the suite can't be built/run in-image AND no report is committed, coverage is reported NOT-MEASURED (excluded from the score) with the precondition to make it measurable — never a LoC-ratio proxy folded in as if measured. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 4.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

Line coverage 19.1% — 106 file(s) below 50% · 30 method(s) over the CRAP-30 risk line.

Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs · ×106src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs:1
CRAP 110: TypeExtensions.FindInterfacesThatClose · ×4src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:762
CRAP 156: OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.TransformAsync · ×2src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs:12
No test project references Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHostsrc/Aspire/Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost/Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost.csproj
CRAP 210: ModuleExtensions.AddModulesServicessrc/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/ModuleExtensions.cs:13

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 106 Low coverage finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs (4), WebApplicationExtensions.cs (3), DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (106 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 CRAP 110 finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with TypeExtensions.cs, OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs, ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 2 CRAP 156 finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs, SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d8_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

56 test methods: 48 unit, 8 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality8.1 / 10Adequategated by 3 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.

Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.

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

0 skipped, 4 zero-assertion, 1 mock references across 56 tests.

No assertions (empty test): category_trait_test · ×3tests/Shared/Tests.Shared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs:7
Test project verifies nothing: Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests · ×2tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests/DependencyTests.cs:14
No assertions: validate_service_dependenciestests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests/DependencyTests.cs:14
Mock framework: NSubstitute

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with Tests.cs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Test project verifies nothing finding(s) in Test Quality — start with DependencyTests.cs, Tests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with DependencyTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene3.9 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 3.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

81 outdated, 1 vulnerable, 1 deprecated, 2 prerelease packages.

Vulnerable: MessagePack
Prerelease dependency: ErrorProne.NET.CoreAnalyzers · ×2
Deprecated: FluentValidation.AspNetCoreREDACTED:54
Outdated: coverlet.msbuild · ×4tests/Directory.Packages.props:43
Outdated: AsyncAwaitBestPractices · ×77

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Prerelease dependency finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

0 of 248 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 83 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 167 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

148 deducted debt markers + unmeasured dead symbols across 11123 LoC in the .NET projects (9.7/KLoC) → score 0.0. Dead code not measured: the solution did not load cleanly, so the reference search was skipped.

AnalyzerSeverityNone · ×117.editorconfig:163
NoWarnInCsproj · ×4tests/Directory.Build.props:8
EmptyCatchBlock · ×3src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:21
FileScopedPragmaDisablesrc/Shared/Cache/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:11
WriteOnlyPrivateFieldtests/Shared/Tests.Shared/Factory/CustomWebApplicationFactory.cs:18

+ 5 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 117 AnalyzerSeverityNone finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with .editorconfig (117). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (117 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 NoWarnInCsproj finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with Directory.Build.props (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 3 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with QueryCollectionExtensions.cs (2), HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
  4. Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D18 · Solution Shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the solution is laid out in a sensible, conventional structure.

Method: Solution structure: project count, decomposition, shell-project detection, build success (confirmed failures cap the score); traced to actual .sln files and binaries. Deterministic.

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

15 projects, 365 source files, 15670 hand-written lines of code (11123 production / 4547 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), plus 148 generated (machine-written code — designer, scaffolded and tool-emitted files — excluded from quality), 17 inter-project edges.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md.

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README is a well-structured overview of the Vertical Slice API Template project: it states what the template is (an ASP.NET Core template based on Vertical Slice Architecture, CQRS, Minimal APIs, API versioning, OpenAPI, and .NET Aspire), links to NuGet, GitHub Actions, and Codespaces, and lists a table of contents that includes Install, Features, Libraries and Infrastructure, Testing, Getting Started, Setup (Dev Certificate/Conventional Commit), Application Structure, Vertical Slice Flow, and How to Run. The src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/readme.md README is the directory-level migration script README for the App project, not the repository; it documents that directory only and has no repository-wide overview or contribution guidance. The tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.LoadTest/k6/readme.md README similarly documents its own subdirectory.

XML-doc coverage: Vertical.Slice.Template · ×5src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Vertical.Slice.Template.csproj

What to do

  1. Improve Documentation Quality — currently 7.0/10. — The repository's root README is a well-structured overview of the Vertical Slice API Template project: it states what the template is (an ASP.NET Core template based on Vertical Slice Architecture, CQRS, Minimal APIs, API versioning, OpenAPI, and .NET Aspire), links to NuGet, GitHub Actions, and Codespaces, and lists a table of contents that includes Install, Features, Libraries and Infrastructure, Testing, Getting Started, Setup (Dev Certificate/Conventional Commit), Application Structure, Vertical Slice Flow, and How to Run. The src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/readme.md README is the directory-level migration script README for the App project, not the repository; it documents that directory only and has no repository-wide overview or contribution guidance. The tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.LoadTest/k6/readme.md README similarly documents its own subdirectory.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

1 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

Typo in method name: 'AddingSofDeletes' likely intends 'AddingSoftDeletes'. The word 'Sof' is a typo for 'Soft'.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D24 · Comment ValueExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on deterministically sampled inline comments with surrounding code; findings verified back to sampled comments by substring match. Advisory, sampled.

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

88 valuable / 0 redundant across 200 sampled comments.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion8.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 15 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split Shared

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Split Shared finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D27 · Navigability8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.

Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.

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

97 % of calls cross a namespace and 13 % go through an interface, but 92 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

What to do

  1. Improve Navigability — currently 8.0/10. — 97 % of calls cross a namespace and 13 % go through an interface, but 92 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.2 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

40 finding(s): 0 critical, 17 high, 22 medium, 1 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 68 file(s) — `REDACTED`, `REDACTED`, `REDACTED`, `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/Item/ProductsItemRequestBuilder.cs` (lines 12–90), `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/ProductsRequestBuilder.cs`, … (+63 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. In 39 of those file(s) — `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/GettingProductById/v1/GetProductById.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/GettingProductsByPage/v1/GetProductsByPage.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Clients/ConnectedService/CatalogsConnectedServiceClient.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Clients/Kiota/CatalogsKiotaClient.cs`, … (+34 more) — the break is a C# primary constructor, which semgrep's grammar cannot parse and which hides the type from every rule scoped to it; those files were re-scanned from a shadow copy with the constructor's parameter list blanked (line and column preserving), which restores the type to the rules, and 0 additional row(s) came from that pass. Only the header's own parameter list is unread in them. In 9 of those file(s) — `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/Item/ProductsItemRequestBuilder.cs`, `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/ProductsRequestBuilder.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Data/GenericRepository.cs`, `src/Shared/Core/Exceptions/AppException.cs`, `src/Shared/Core/Exceptions/BadRequestException.cs`, … (+4 more) — the break is at a TYPE DECLARATION (a C# primary constructor semgrep's grammar cannot parse), so the loss is wider than the named lines: rules scoped to that type see no type to scope to and are blind over its whole body, while rules matching statements keep working there. Absence of a type-scoped finding in those types is not evidence of anything.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

+ 3 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 15 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (9), REDACTED (5), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (15 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities3.8 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 3.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

8 finding(s): 2 critical, 6 high, 0 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Critical CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).

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

D31 · IaC & Container Security0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 97% · ceiling Documented

524 finding(s): 0 critical, 27 high, 410 medium, 87 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 410 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (27), REDACTED (27), REDACTED (27). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (410 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 27 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (11), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (27 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 87 Low IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (6), REDACTED (6), REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (87 recommendation-level).

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

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

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

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

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

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 57 of the 255 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

D39 · IL Efficiency10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Method: IL instruction count per method, read from the BUILT first-party assemblies via Mono.Cecil (the target is compiled on a deep run); scored on the fraction of methods whose emitted IL body exceeds the size threshold. Sees compiler-generated bloat source can't; not-applicable when the target fails to build. Deterministic.

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

0 of 620 first-party methods have an oversized IL body.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d39_recommendation.md.

D40 · Network Egress Confinement6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether Kubernetes workloads restrict network EGRESS with a NetworkPolicy (or Cilium policy), limiting where a compromised pod can send data or reach a command-and-control server. Presence of committed egress-restricting policy, not runtime enforcement.

Method: Deterministic YAML-manifest inspection (no external tool, no Roslyn — language-agnostic): Kubernetes workloads gate applicability; credits a NetworkPolicy / Cilium policy that restricts egress (policyTypes: [Egress] / egress rules). Reward-leaning (neutral floor climbing to 10, never a deduction — baseline misconfigs stay with D31). Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0/2 network-egress controls present (network policy, egress restriction).

No network policy

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No network policy finding(s) in Network Egress Confinement. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d40_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether Kubernetes workloads confine the kernel boundary — a seccomp profile (RuntimeDefault/Localhost) plus an AppArmor/SELinux mandatory-access-control layer — shrinking the syscall attack surface a container escape would use. Presence of committed confinement config, not runtime enforcement.

Method: Deterministic YAML-manifest inspection (no external tool, no Roslyn): on Kubernetes workloads, credits a seccomp profile (RuntimeDefault/Localhost) and an AppArmor/SELinux MAC layer. Reward-leaning (neutral floor climbing to 10); NotApplicable without workloads. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0/15 workload(s) run every container under a seccomp profile; 0/15 declare an AppArmor/SELinux profile.

No seccomp profile · ×15REDACTED:8

What to do

  1. Resolve the 15 No seccomp profile finding(s) in Kernel & Syscall Confinement — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (15 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d41_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 2 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.

Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.

AX10 · Code composition7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does.

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

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

What to do

  • The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
AX2 · Stateful singletons5.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.

Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.

  • `DiagnosticsProvider` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_activitySource, _listener, _meter; e.g. `_activitySource` at line 28). — src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:10

What to do

  • Keep singletons stateless or back their state with thread-safe types (Concurrent*/Immutable*); otherwise concurrent callers race.
AX3 · Project dependency cycles10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • The namespaces Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain ↔ Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain → Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events (Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.IHaveAggregate → Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events.IHaveDomainEvents, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Domain/IHaveAggregate.cs:1

What to do

  • Break namespace cycles inside a project by moving the shared type to a namespace both sides can use, or by inverting the back edge behind an interface.
AX4 · Dependency direction10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

AX5 · Architecture & structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.

Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.

AX6 · Interface segregation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.

AX7 · Slice cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether feature slices stay independent (no direct cross-slice references) — the discipline that makes vertical-slice architecture pay off.

Method: Roslyn scan (vertical-slice gated): feature slices resolved from namespaces (.Features.*, .Slices.*) or project names; cross-slice type references detected. Deterministic, traceable.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

C2 · Access Controls3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether access is authorized by default — a framework authorization attribute/decorator or policy, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from handlers.

Method: Roslyn scan: [Authorize] usage and authorization policies, plus imperative throw-on-violation guard methods detected via syntax. Deterministic.

  • Authorization machinery exists but no [Authorize] usage and no imperative guard calls were found at handlers.

What to do

  • Enforce authorization at every handler — call the guard method (throw-on-violation) from each one, or adopt [Authorize] so protected-by-default is demonstrable.
C3 · Audit Trail7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether changes to sensitive data are recorded (who, what, when) for compliance + incident response.

Method: Roslyn scan: audit-trail mechanism graded (SaveChanges interceptor/immutable AuditLog/[Audited] strong; bare IAuditable/AddAuditing weak). Deterministic.

  • An audit mechanism is present, but the trail is not yet complete — missing: an immutable audit-log / audit-trail type to write to, [Audited] per-entity coverage.

What to do

  • Back the audit convention with a structural mechanism: an EF SaveChanges interceptor (or equivalent) writing every sensitive change to an immutable audit log, and apply [Audited] to the entities that need a who-changed-what trail.
C4 · Data Retention6.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether data has a defined lifetime — retention periods, TTLs, cleanup jobs (storage limitation).

Method: Roslyn scan: retention/TTL configuration presence in schema; CascadeDelete detected but not scored as retention control. Deterministic, gated by PII presence.

  • A retention mechanism is present, but the data-lifecycle is not yet complete — missing: a scheduled purge / cleanup job (PurgeOlderThan / CleanupJob), a documented retention period / data-expiry.

What to do

  • Complete the data-lifecycle story: an expiry limit (a declared maximum age for the stored data — a retention-age setting, or a store-level TTL where your storage offers one), a scheduled purge/cleanup job that enforces it, and a documented retention period covering the personal data.
DM1 · Aggregate boundaries10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates reference each other by identity (id) rather than by direct object reference — the core DDD consistency-boundary rule.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): aggregate roots identified by convention; each aggregate field checked for direct references to other aggregates versus id-only. Deterministic, DDD-native.

Coverage: Population: aggregate roots identified by AggregateRoot/IAggregateRoot base/interface NAME convention; reference-by-identity then checked exhaustively within that set — a root not using those names is invisible.

DM10 · One transaction, one aggregate10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether a single operation mutates more than one aggregate root. An aggregate is a consistency boundary, so saving two together fuses them into one — the second's invariants come to depend on the first's transaction, and the pair can no longer be separated. Reads of other aggregates are not counted.

Method: Neutral body surface (DDD-gated): every method body scanned for repository WRITE calls (Add/Update/Save/Remove/Delete/Insert/Store and their async forms), keyed on the ARGUMENT type rather than the repository type — three `IRepository<T>` writes collapse to one repository but are three distinct aggregates. Reads (Get/Find/Load/Query) are excluded, so loading another aggregate for context never counts. Score is offending methods over methods that write at all. Deterministic.

DM11 · Constructible invalid state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether an aggregate can be constructed in a state its own rules forbid — a public constructor that takes a raw primitive, stores it, and validates nothing, with no factory beside it. A constructor taking only value objects is not counted: each parameter has already validated itself.

Method: Neutral surface (DDD-gated): each non-abstract entity/aggregate checked for a PUBLIC constructor taking at least one RAW PRIMITIVE parameter whose body contains no guard token (throw / Guard. / Ensure. / ArgumentException / CheckRule), on a type that also offers no static Create/Of/From/New factory. A constructor taking only value objects is never charged -- measured: 64 of 87 unguarded public constructors on the C# corpus take value objects only, so ignoring parameter types would be 73% false positives. One finding per entity. Deterministic.

DM12 · Ambient inputs in the domain10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether domain types receive the time and randomness their rules depend on, rather than reading the process clock or a global random source directly — an ambient read makes the rule it feeds untestable at the instant that matters and lets two reads inside one operation disagree.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated, C#/VB only): domain-layer types scanned for ambient reads — DateTime/DateTimeOffset.Now/UtcNow/Today, Random.Shared, new Random(), Stopwatch.GetTimestamp — resolved against the semantic model, with a comment/string-stripped token fallback only where resolution fails. Body reads are scored; field/property initialisers are surfaced unscored. Apply/When folds excluded (ES1 owns them). Deterministic, symbol-resolved.

DM2 · Strongly-typed ids3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — How much of the domain uses strongly-typed ids vs raw Guid/string/int — adoption curve, not all-or-nothing.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): strongly-typed id adoption on domain entities/events; raw Guid/int/string ids counted versus wrapped types. An id wrapper is recognised by VALUE SEMANTICS, not by being a struct — a record struct, a record class (`record ApartmentId(Guid Value)`) or a class declared by a typed-id base (`class MemberId : TypedIdValueBase`) all count, while a plain mutable class (reference equality) and a verb-phrase query record (`GetCustomerById`) do not. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

Coverage: Population: id-like members by *Id/*Key NAME suffix; strongly-typed-ID shape then checked semantically — non-suffixed identifiers are not seen.

  • `ProductCreatedDomainEvent.CategoryId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that. — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:17
  • `IEvent.EventId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that. — src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Domain/Events/IEvent.cs:13
  • `IMessage.MessageId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that. — src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Messaging/IMessage.cs:7
  • `IMessage.CorrelationId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that. — src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Messaging/IMessage.cs:8
  • `Event.EventId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that. — src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/Event.cs:8

What to do

  • Adopt strongly-typed ids across the domain — finish the migration or document the boundary; primitive ids invite transposed-argument bugs.
DM3 · Integration-event coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether cross-context integration events stay loosely coupled — no producer-owned enums/domain types leaking to consumers. Shared-kernel/contracts types are allowed.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): integration-event properties scanned for producer-domain type/enum leaks versus primitives and shared-kernel types. Deterministic, hard fact.

DM4 · Rich vs anemic model3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates/entities carry the behaviour that protects their invariants, rather than being data bags driven by external services.

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

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

  • `AuditableEntity` is an aggregate/entity with 2 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — src/Shared/Core/Domain/AuditableEntity.cs:5

What to do

  • Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.
DM5 · Encapsulated state10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether entities protect their state — private/init-only setters, and collections handed out as read-only views rather than the mutable backing collection — instead of exposing writable state that bypasses invariants. Softened when a rehydration framework (Marten/EF) is present.

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

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

DM6 · Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies (EF/Marten/HTTP/ASP.NET) — the clean-architecture dependency rule.

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

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

DM8 · Value-object opportunities10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether clusters of primitives that travel together (a missing value object) are extracted — a low-weight suggestion, LLM-confirmed when configured.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): primitive parameter clusters recurring three or more times across signatures extracted, then confirmed by language model when configured. Advisory, low-weight.

DM9 · Scattered domain decisions10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether one domain rule is decided — or one measurement produced — in more than one place, rather than living on the type that owns it.

Method: Neutral body surface plus Roslyn (DDD-gated), two arms. DECISION (Roslyn only): a predicate over a domain type's members judged in two or more types, where none of those decisions live on the owning type — operands of comparisons and relational property patterns only, so a member merely passed as an argument is not judged. DERIVATION: a plain all-numeric carrier of ≥2 members, with no base type and exactly one constructor, CONSTRUCTED as the result of a method (returned or assigned, never inline as an argument) in two or more types other than its own — the same measurement produced twice, which centralising the judgement does not fix. DERIVATION runs on every language whose frontend declares the produced-or-passed fact per construction (Roslyn and the Java sidecar today); a target with only the derivation arm carries an engine gap naming the decision arm as not assessed, and a frontend that declares nothing keeps the dimension not measured rather than clean. Single-member rules, test code and generated code are out of population for both. Advisory.

ED1 · Handler temporal coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether event handlers stay asynchronous (no blocking remote HTTP/gRPC calls awaited inside a handler).

Method: Roslyn semantic scan (event-driven gated): event-handler bodies scanned for HTTP/gRPC invocations by resolved symbol type, not substring. Deterministic, semantic-resolved.

ED3 · Event naming10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether events are named in the past tense (a clarity nudge — low weight).

Method: Roslyn scan (event-driven gated): domain and integration events checked for past-tense naming (-ed/-en suffix or irregular set). Naming nudge, low-weight advisory.

ED4 · Outbox / dual-write4.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether state changes and message publishes are atomic (a transactional outbox) rather than a crash-unsafe dual write.

Method: Roslyn semantic scan (event-driven gated): event-handler methods scanned for DB-save plus bus-publish without a transactional outbox reference. Deterministic, semantic-resolved.

  • `CreateProductHandler.Handle` writes to the database AND publishes to the message bus in the same flow, with no outbox referenced in this path. These two writes aren't atomic — a crash between them either loses the message (DB committed, publish failed) or emits a phantom event (publish succeeded, DB rolled back). Use the transactional outbox pattern — write the message to an outbox table in the SAME transaction as the state change, and dispatch it from there afterwards — or your platform's equivalent (a broker transaction, or an outbox library from your own ecosystem). — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs:57

What to do

  • Adopt the transactional outbox pattern so DB writes and message publishes commit atomically — no lost or phantom events on a crash.
ED5 · Idempotency10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

Other · Readiness — Whether retry-prone mutations (command handlers + message/event consumers) are idempotent so an at-least-once redelivery or client retry doesn't double-apply the effect — heuristic at-risk detection confirmed by language model, advisory.

Method: Roslyn heuristic (any mutation, ungated): command handlers and message/event consumers that mutate persistent state without a visible idempotency guard (exists/dedup check, upsert, idempotency-key/inbox, conditional/versioned write, fixed-value set) flagged as at-risk; each at-risk candidate then confirmed or cleared by a language model as genuinely non-idempotent versus naturally-idempotent. Advisory without a model (heuristic-only, degraded), per-candidate judged with one.

Coverage: Population: retry-prone mutations — command handlers (CQRS write side) + message/event consumers (IConsumer/I*EventHandler) — that mutate persistent state; runs on any repo with mutations, not only event-driven ones. The at-risk subset (no obvious guard) is a HEURISTIC candidate set, each then LLM-JUDGED non-idempotent vs safe; a handler outside those conventions, or a guard the LLM can't confirm, is bounded by the sample. Degrades to heuristic-only when no model is configured.

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs8.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords: members that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant, async methods that never await, dead `if (false)` / `#if false` branches, and skeleton types most of whose members are holes. A real, objective slice of technical debt.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

  • `AddProductsModuleServices` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/ProductConfigurations.cs:15
  • A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×7) — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:35, src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:36, src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:37, …

What to do

  • Finish or delete the unfinished stubs (NotImplementedException / empty / constant-returning bodies) — they are dead surface that looks live.
  • Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
M1 · Documentation (README)8.1 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a README to the 14 of 15 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.9 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
M3 · Folder & project structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

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

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

P2 · Observability8.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Only 2/5 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log). Of those 5, 2 ship a process this repository operates; the rest are libraries their consumer hosts, where the logging decision belongs to the host.

What to do

  • Extend structured logging across the projects you operate, and give the library ones a diagnostics seam instead — an `EventSource`/`ActivitySource` the host can subscribe to, or an optional logger on your options object — rather than taking a logging dependency on your consumers' behalf.
P3 · Security & performance tooling4.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback8.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • The pipeline declares a deployment environment, but whether required reviewers / protection rules are attached to it lives in repository settings we cannot read — confirm the gate is enforced before production promotion.
P5 · DR & Backup7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether disaster recovery is planned and codified — backups, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees — from IaC + container manifests + docs, never the live cloud.

Method: Filesystem scan: disaster recovery, backup, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees from IaC, manifests, and docs. Exhaustive, deterministic, never a live environment.

What to do

  • Document RTO/RPO and a tested restore procedure (a backup config alone isn't disaster recovery).
P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — Whether outbound HTTP calls are wrapped in resilience (retry/timeout/circuit-breaker) so a failing dependency doesn't cascade.

Method: Source scan: outbound HTTP clients and what bounds them — resilience handlers (Polly, AddStandardResilienceHandler) on .NET; on Go, the JVM, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, PHP, Rust, Elixir, Swift, Dart and Erlang, a timeout, deadline, retry or breaker beside each call, or a process-wide client default (a framework-wide deadline such as Drupal core's, Laravel's or actix's awc counts). Exhaustive, deterministic.

P8 · Schema migrations10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — Whether EF Core schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than the un-evolvable EnsureCreated().

Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage; off .NET, a file scan of dependency manifests, migration histories (Flyway, Liquibase, Alembic, Django, Rails, Prisma, TypeORM, Knex/Sequelize, golang-migrate, goose, Laravel, Doctrine, Diesel/sqlx) and schema auto-create in production source or config. Exhaustive, deterministic.

P9 · Domain vs controller coverage2.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether test coverage concentrates on the domain (business rules) rather than the trivial web/controller layer — a focus check a generic tool can't make.

Method: Roslyn plus test-execution analysis: domain-layer versus trivial web/controller coverage ratio. Computed metric, deterministic.

  • Domain coverage is 11%, against a bar of 50% for this row — the layer carrying the business rules is the least covered part of the codebase that matters most. Measured over the types this analyzer classifies as domain (aggregates, value objects, domain services), so code the classifier does not place in the domain is neither counted for nor against this figure.

What to do

  • Raise unit-test coverage of the domain (aggregates, value objects, domain services) — that's where correctness matters most.
PF1 · Benchmark discipline6.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code protects its performance with benchmarks — a benchmark suite, allocation/memory measurement, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.

Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI; off .NET, the same ladder over Go testing.B, Rust criterion/#[bench]/divan, JMH/kotlinx-benchmark, pytest-benchmark/asv/pyperf, tinybench/mitata/vitest bench/benchmark.js and Swift package-benchmark — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

  • No benchmark suite was found by the two searches this check runs. FIRST, a BenchmarkDotNet package reference in any project file — every project the workspace loaded, plus a walk of project files on disk that never loaded, because a benchmark suite is exactly the project a partial load drops. SECOND, a script harness: a file whose name contains `benchmark` and ends `.py`, `.sh`, `.ps1`, `.bash`, `.rb`, `.js` or `.mjs`, credited ONLY when this repository's CI text also mentions benchmarks — a harness no pipeline runs is read as a fixture, deliberately. Neither search can see a benchmark suite in another ecosystem's idiom (a Go `testing.B` file, a JMH or criterion project, a pytest-benchmark run), so this is 'no benchmark found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none. Where code is performance-sensitive, a benchmark guards against silent regressions — but it's a bonus here, not a deduction.

What to do

  • Add a benchmarking harness for the hot paths and run it in CI to catch regressions (for .NET, a BenchmarkDotNet project with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations).
PF2 · Allocation hygiene7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 28 use(s) across 11,679 production line(s) (~2.4/1k). More Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc and ValueTask on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

S1 · Web-Security Posture6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Transport security, security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order and crypto hygiene (presence, not runtime).

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.

  • None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is configured — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • This web host's pipeline is composed here and adds no security response header (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, a frame policy) to what it serves. — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/Program.cs:13
  • No UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts and no reverse-proxy signal — transport security is unverified at the app layer. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • This web host's pipeline is composed here with no UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts, and nothing says a reverse proxy terminates TLS in front of it. — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/Program.cs:13

What to do

  • Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy first, then Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options and a frame policy) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
  • Enforce HTTPS at the app layer (UseHttpsRedirection / UseHsts) — only skip this if a reverse proxy demonstrably terminates TLS.
X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `builder.ServiceProvider.CreateScope()` (line 70) creates an `IServiceScope`, and it is bound to the local `scope`, which this method only reads through and never disposes. A scope owns every scoped service resolved from it — the `DbContext`, its connection, anything registered `AddScoped` — and releases them only when the scope itself is disposed; nothing here ever does, so each scope's services stay alive until the process ends. Create it with `using var scope = …CreateScope();` (or `await using` for `CreateAsyncScope`), or, when it must outlive the method, dispose it from the owning type's `Dispose`. — src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/MinimalApiExtensions.cs:70

What to do

  • Each finding names the value and the span that decides who owns it — the `new` that created it, or the constructor parameter that handed it over. Confirm ownership from that span, then make the disposal match it: release what this type created, leave what it was injected with to whoever created THAT, and drop a finalizer whose type holds nothing unmanaged to release.
X19 · Unrestored process-global state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

X2 · Cancellation propagation8.5 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether async methods accept a CancellationToken so work can be cancelled (adoption curve).

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

  • Only 57/74 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter, and the token `app.Lifetime.ApplicationStarted` carries reaches none of the calls here that take one — this work can't be stopped early once started. Pass `app.Lifetime.ApplicationStarted` on, or take a CancellationToken. — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/CatalogsConfigurations.cs:25
  • No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×15) — src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs:20, src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs:36, src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs:68, …
  • 2 async method(s) await work their caller's cancellation cannot reach: a CancellationToken they hold (a parameter, or the one a framework-fixed signature carries) is never passed on, or the call is handed CancellationToken.None, default or an already-cancelled token. Forward the caller's token to that call.
  • Its signature is fixed by the framework, and the token it carries (`context.HttpContext.RequestAborted`) reaches none of the calls here that take one — so an aborted request or a stopping host still waits for that work. Pass `context.HttpContext.RequestAborted` to them. — src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsWriter.cs:16
  • Accepts a CancellationToken and never uses it, while it calls something that takes one — so a caller who cancels still waits for that work. Pass the token on (or, where the work must outlive the caller, start it without awaiting it so the choice is visible). — src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients/Clients/CatalogsConectedServiceApiClient.g.cs:486

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X20 · Mistyped argument guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `ArgumentNullException` tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation4.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `LogDebug` at line 35 is called with an argument built by `JsonSerializer.Serialize(message)` (line 39), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. — src/Shared/EF/EfTxBehavior.cs:35
  • `LogDebug` at line 34 is called with an argument built by `JsonSerializer.Serialize(message)` (line 37), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. — src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs:34
  • `LogDebug` at line 86 is called with an argument built by `JsonSerializer.Serialize(message)` (line 89), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. — src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs:86

What to do

  • Each finding names the diagnostic call and the expression inside its argument whose cost scales with a collection. Confirm from the two that the argument is built before the call — that is C#'s evaluation order, not a guess — then put the construction behind the same level check the sink applies: `if (logger.IsEnabled(LogLevel.Trace))` for Microsoft.Extensions.Logging, the repository's own debug flag where it has one, or a message template whose ARGUMENTS the logging framework only formats when the level is on. Moving the call is not the fix: it is the join/projection in the argument that is paid, wherever the call sits.
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Other · Code Health — Whether a `foreach` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is enumerating invalidates the enumerator it is holding, so the next `MoveNext` throws `InvalidOperationException` and the remaining items are never seen.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

X3 · Exception handling5.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×3) — src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:21, src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:23, src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:82

What to do

  • Swallowed exception (empty catch)
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly2.7 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether a plugin lookup names the type it means — searching every assembly loaded into the process for a candidate whose SIMPLE name equals a string supplied at runtime, and taking the first one found, is decided by assembly LOAD ORDER rather than by this source, so the same name can resolve to a different type on the next run.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every invocation of `First`/`FirstOrDefault`/`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` whose OWN expression subtree contains both a `GetAssemblies()` call and a `GetTypes()`/`GetExportedTypes()` call — a single-element pick out of every type loaded into the process. A nested selector in the same chain sees no `GetAssemblies()` in its own subtree and is outside the population, so one lookup counts once however many links its chain has. A finding additionally needs both remaining halves: the selector must be `First`/`FirstOrDefault` (`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` reports the ambiguity rather than resolving it, and is counted and never reported), and the chain must carry an `==` comparison of `<lambda parameter>.Name` against something that is not a literal. The receiver must be a plain identifier bound by one of the chain’s own lambdas, which places `assembly.GetName().Name == "X"` outside the rule by construction. One exemption: a `.Name` test joined by `&&` to a `FullName`/`AssemblyQualifiedName` test on the same identifier is spared; joined by `||` it is not. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • `x.Name == typeName` picks a type by its SIMPLE name out of `AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()`, and `FirstOrDefault` then takes whichever one comes first. Neither half of that is decided by this source. `Type.Name` is not unique — the namespace is what separates two types spelled the same way — and the assembly list is in LOAD order, so which `x` wins depends on which code path ran first and changes the moment another assembly contributing a same-named type is loaded. The same value of `typeName` can therefore resolve to different types in two runs of the same binary, and the run that picks the wrong one fails at the cast or the call, far from here. Compare `x.FullName` or `AssemblyQualifiedName`, which the namespace makes unique, or take the matches with `Where` and reject a set of more than one — `typeName` naming two types is a configuration error worth saying out loud, not a coin to flip. (×2) — src/Shared/Core/Reflection/ReflectionUtilities.cs:79, src/Shared/Core/Reflection/ReflectionUtilities.cs:87

What to do

  • Each finding names the comparison that matches on `Type.Name` and the selector that takes the first survivor. Confirm from that span that the searched set is every loaded assembly, then decide which the lookup meant: if the name is meant to identify ONE type, compare `FullName` or `AssemblyQualifiedName`, which the namespace makes unique; if several types may legitimately answer to it, keep them all (`Where`) and reject a set of more than one, so a name that is ambiguous is reported as the configuration error it is instead of resolved by load order.
X4 · Structured logging10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.

X5 · Nullable reference types8.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.

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

  • ~1.4 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 70 suppression(s) across the 48520 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.

What to do

  • Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.

Reference — by lens

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

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health58%Adequate — gated by D17Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture81%StrongStrongest area.
Maturity77%ExemplarySolid.
Readiness51%Adequate — gated by D12, P9Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security50%Adequate — gated by D29, D30, D31, C2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling67%Adequate — gated by DM2, DM4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event-Driven68%StrongSolid.
Performance74%StrongSolid.
Unscored — 2 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

  • X10 Duplicated predicate — 4 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 1 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Repo shows no corroborated data-subject-rights mechanism (erasure / export-portability / consent) tied to a subject id or GDPR vocabulary — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Implement erasure, data export/portability and consent tracking over the subject's records.
Not included — 29 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — the Aspire AppHost did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time (or only the dashboard) — no runtime evidence This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
  • C1 Data Protection — This is a dotnet-new template — at-rest encryption and key-vaulting are deferred to the application you build from it. Add ASP.NET Data Protection / column encryption + a key vault for your real data store when you productionise.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not measured — no test run produced results
  • D16 Bus Factor — single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable
  • D20 ADR Quality — N/A — this repo declares itself a template / kata / sample / demo; a formal ADR log is deferred to a real application built from it.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — small single-context codebase (11,123 production LoC in the .NET projects) — bounded contexts are not needed at this size No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 64 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — This is a dotnet-new template — it produces no released artifact to attest. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM are deferred to the application you build from it (add SLSA provenance / cosign signing / an SBOM in your app's release pipeline).
  • 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.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — The repository ships application workloads but no cluster-governance resources (CRDs, admission webhooks, or a committed policy engine). Runtime threat-detection (Falco/Tetragon) and admission control (Kyverno/OPA-Gatekeeper/PodSecurity) are cluster-OPERATOR controls owned by the platform, not shipped by an application repo/chart — nothing for this repo to assess.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
  • DM7 Repository granularity — no repository abstraction detected (e.g. uses a document session)
  • ED2 Event/command shape — no command-shaped messages detected — single-handler-per-command check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 184 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · AnalyzerSeverityNone · ×117
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:163 — CA1030 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:164 — CA1034 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:170 — CA1031 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:172 — CA1303 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:178 — CA1308 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:182 — CA1724 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:184 — CA1819 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:192 — CA1861 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:194 — CA2007 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:196 — CA2225 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:198 — CA3075 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:200 — CA5369 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:202 — CA1305 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:204 — CA1063 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:214 — CA1515 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:218 — CA1707 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:387 — SA1200 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:390 — SA1622 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:393 — SA0001 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:396 — SA1633 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:399 — SA1122 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:402 — SA1312 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:405 — SA1313 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:408 — SA1600 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:414 — SA1202 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
  • + 92 more in this group — see findings.md.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×27
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 2 more in this group — see findings.md.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×6
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D17 · Explicit Debt · NoWarnInCsproj · ×4
  • NoWarnInCsproj tests/Directory.Build.props:8 — CS1587 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj tests/Directory.Build.props:8 — CS1591 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj tests/Directory.Build.props:8 — CS1998 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
  • NoWarnInCsproj tests/Directory.Build.props:8 — NU5105 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, including builds years from now. It is raised by the build itself — the packaging, restore or SDK step — about the project as a whole, not by the compiler or an analyzer at a line of code, so there is no call site to narrow it to and no per-site directive that could carry a reason: this element is the only place the decision can be recorded. Say WHY here, in a comment on the entry, or fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list.
D10 · Test Quality · No assertions (empty test) · ×3
  • No assertions (empty test): category_trait_test tests/Shared/Tests.Shared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs:7 — Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
  • No assertions (empty test): feature_trait_test tests/Shared/Tests.Shared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs:11 — Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
  • No assertions (empty test): bug_trait_test tests/Shared/Tests.Shared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs:15 — Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
D17 · Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock · ×3
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:21 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:23 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:82 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AX3 · Project dependency cycles · Namespace dependency cycle · ×1
  • Namespace dependency cycle src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Domain/IHaveAggregate.cs:1 — The namespaces Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain ↔ Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain → Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events (Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.IHaveAggregate → Shared.Abstractions.Core.Domain.Events.IHaveDomainEvents, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Vulnerable · ×1
  • Vulnerable: MessagePack — REDACTED — High severity. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
D17 · Explicit Debt · FileScopedPragmaDisable · ×1
  • FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Shared/Cache/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:11 — #pragma warning disable EXTEXP0018 — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
D17 · Explicit Debt · WriteOnlyPrivateField · ×1
  • WriteOnlyPrivateField tests/Shared/Tests.Shared/Factory/CustomWebApplicationFactory.cs:18 — private ITestOutputHelper? _outputHelper — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
ED4 · Outbox / dual-write · Dual write (no outbox) · ×1
  • Dual write (no outbox): CreateProductHandler.Handle src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs:57 — `CreateProductHandler.Handle` writes to the database AND publishes to the message bus in the same flow, with no outbox referenced in this path. These two writes aren't atomic — a crash between them either loses the message (DB committed, publish failed) or emits a phantom event (publish succeeded, DB rolled back). Use the transactional outbox pattern — write the message to an outbox table in the SAME transaction as the state change, and dispatch it from there afterwards — or your platform's equivalent (a broker transaction, or an outbox library from your own ecosystem).
Serious — 609 finding(s)
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×410
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 385 more in this group — see findings.md.
D8 · Code Coverage · Low coverage · ×106
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/14).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsService.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsService.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/66).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsWriter.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsWriter.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/19).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/8).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareImp.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/Middlewares/CaptureExceptionMiddleware/CaptureExceptionMiddlewareImp.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/22).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/InternalHttpProblemResult.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/InternalHttpProblemResult.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/26).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/NotFoundHttpProblemResult.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/NotFoundHttpProblemResult.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/24).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/UnAuthorizedHttpProblemResult.cs src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/HttpResults/UnAuthorizedHttpProblemResult.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/26).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/EndpointConventionBuilderExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/EndpointConventionBuilderExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/45).
  • Low coverage: REDACTED REDACTED:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/55).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/MinimalApiExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/MinimalApiExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/67).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/ModuleExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/ModuleExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/78).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/TypedResultsExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/TypedResultsExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/25).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CompressionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CompressionExtensions.cs:1 — 40.0% line coverage (6/15).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CorsExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/CorsExtensions.cs:1 — 21.7% line coverage (5/23).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/31).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/83).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs:1 — 6.8% line coverage (4/59).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/ValidationError.cs src/Shared/Validation/ValidationError.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/7).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/ValidationResultModel.cs src/Shared/Validation/ValidationResultModel.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/13).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Validation/Extensions/ValidatorExtension.cs src/Shared/Validation/Extensions/ValidatorExtension.cs:1 — 21.7% line coverage (5/23).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:1 — 32.0% line coverage (98/306).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/RateLimit/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs src/Shared/RateLimit/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:1 — 14.6% line coverage (7/48).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/72).
  • Low coverage: src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/CorrelationIdHeaderOperationFilter.cs src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/CorrelationIdHeaderOperationFilter.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/17).
  • + 81 more in this group — see findings.md.
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken · ×16
  • Async method without CancellationToken: UseCatalogs src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/CatalogsConfigurations.cs:25 — No CancellationToken parameter, and the token `app.Lifetime.ApplicationStarted` carries reaches none of the calls here that take one — this work can't be stopped early once started. Pass `app.Lifetime.ApplicationStarted` on, or take a CancellationToken.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: PublishMessage src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs:20 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: PublishMessage src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs:36 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SubscribeMessage src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubExtensions.cs:68 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: PublishAsync src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs:26 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: PublishAsync src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs:38 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SubscribeAsync src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs:51 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SubscribeAsync src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs:64 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: SubscribeWithChannelAsync src/Shared/Cache/RedisPubSubService.cs:77 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RetryOnExceptionAsync src/Shared/EF/EfDbContextBase.cs:125 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RetryOnExceptionAsync src/Shared/EF/EfDbContextBase.cs:130 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetOrCreateConnectionAsync src/Shared/EF/NpgsqlConnectionFactory.cs:20 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: EnsureSuccessStatusCodeWithDetailAsync src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HttpResponseMessageExtensions.cs:12 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: CreateProductAsync src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients/Clients/CatalogsConectedServiceApiClient.g.cs:133 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetProductsByPageAsync src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients/Clients/CatalogsConectedServiceApiClient.g.cs:247 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetProductByIdAsync src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients/Clients/CatalogsConectedServiceApiClient.g.cs:365 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D17 · Explicit Debt · ShadowedAnalyzerSeverity · ×4
  • ShadowedAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:234 — IDE0005 severity is set to warning here and to none at line 243 of the same [*.cs] section — EditorConfig takes the last assignment, so this line has no effect. — the configuration and the build disagree here, and the build is right. A reader auditing this file sees the severity on THIS line and concludes the rule is configured that way; nothing on the line says it was overridden further down, so the elevation reads as policy while the override is what ships. Decide which was meant: if this severity is the real decision, move it below the later entry or delete that one, so the file says what the build does; if the later entry is the real decision, delete this line — it is not a weaker version of the policy, it is no policy at all.
  • ShadowedAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:491 — SA1012 severity is set to suggestion here and to none at line 764 of the same [*.cs] section — EditorConfig takes the last assignment, so this line has no effect. — the configuration and the build disagree here, and the build is right. A reader auditing this file sees the severity on THIS line and concludes the rule is configured that way; nothing on the line says it was overridden further down, so the elevation reads as policy while the override is what ships. Decide which was meant: if this severity is the real decision, move it below the later entry or delete that one, so the file says what the build does; if the later entry is the real decision, delete this line — it is not a weaker version of the policy, it is no policy at all.
  • ShadowedAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:494 — SA1013 severity is set to suggestion here and to none at line 765 of the same [*.cs] section — EditorConfig takes the last assignment, so this line has no effect. — the configuration and the build disagree here, and the build is right. A reader auditing this file sees the severity on THIS line and concludes the rule is configured that way; nothing on the line says it was overridden further down, so the elevation reads as policy while the override is what ships. Decide which was meant: if this severity is the real decision, move it below the later entry or delete that one, so the file says what the build does; if the later entry is the real decision, delete this line — it is not a weaker version of the policy, it is no policy at all.
  • ShadowedAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:579 — RCS1174 severity is set to error here and to suggestion at line 599 of the same [*.cs] section — EditorConfig takes the last assignment, so this line has no effect. — the configuration and the build disagree here, and the build is right. A reader auditing this file sees the severity on THIS line and concludes the rule is configured that way; nothing on the line says it was overridden further down, so the elevation reads as policy while the override is what ships. Decide which was meant: if this severity is the real decision, move it below the later entry or delete that one, so the file says what the build does; if the later entry is the real decision, delete this line — it is not a weaker version of the policy, it is no policy at all.
D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 110 · ×4
  • CRAP 110: TypeExtensions.FindInterfacesThatClose src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:762 — Cyclomatic 10 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
  • CRAP 110: OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.CreateInfoForApiVersion src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs:41 — Cyclomatic 10 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
  • CRAP 110: ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs:49 — Cyclomatic 10 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
  • CRAP 110: DefaultProblemDetailMapper.GetMappedStatusCodes src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/DefaultProblemDetailMapper.cs:9 — Cyclomatic 10 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×3
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:21 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:23 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:82 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
D10 · Test Quality · Test project verifies nothing · ×2
  • Test project verifies nothing: Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests/DependencyTests.cs:14 — No conventional assertion call was detected in 1 of 1 tests in `Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests` — the project as a whole, not one method. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a suite that genuinely checks nothing. If it is the latter, this project passes unconditionally and cannot fail.
  • Test project verifies nothing: Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared tests/Shared/Tests.Shared/XunitCategories/Tests.cs:7 — No conventional assertion call was detected in 3 of 3 tests in `Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared` — the project as a whole, not one method. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a suite that genuinely checks nothing. If it is the latter, this project passes unconditionally and cannot fail.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Prerelease dependency · ×2
  • Prerelease dependency: ErrorProne.NET.CoreAnalyzers — ErrorProne.NET.CoreAnalyzers resolves to 0.7.0-beta.1, a prerelease build. Prerelease packages carry no support policy, may change breaking between previews and can be unlisted — pin a stable release before shipping, or record the reason this preview is required.
  • Prerelease dependency: StyleCop.Analyzers — StyleCop.Analyzers resolves to 1.2.0-beta.556, a prerelease build. Prerelease packages carry no support policy, may change breaking between previews and can be unlisted — pin a stable release before shipping, or record the reason this preview is required.
D17 · Explicit Debt · CommentedOutCode · ×2
  • CommentedOutCode REDACTED:17 — 5 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode src/Shared/Core/Paging/PageRequest.cs:24 — 17 consecutive commented-code lines
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×2
  • TodoComment src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/AuditInterceptor.cs:23 — // var userId = GetCurrentUser(); // TODO: Get current user — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Shared/Validation/Extensions/RegistrationExtensions.cs:13 — // TODO: problem with registering internal validators — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:53 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:53-72 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:89-108 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:130-149 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:53 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:53-72 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:89-108 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:130-149 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:61 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:61-73 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:90-102 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:61` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:26 — src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:26-46 | src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:149-161 — 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 156 · ×2
  • CRAP 156: OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.TransformAsync src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs:12 — Cyclomatic 12 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
  • CRAP 156: SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.Apply src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.cs:18 — Cyclomatic 12 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly · ×2
  • Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly src/Shared/Core/Reflection/ReflectionUtilities.cs:79 — `x.Name == typeName` picks a type by its SIMPLE name out of `AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()`, and `FirstOrDefault` then takes whichever one comes first. Neither half of that is decided by this source. `Type.Name` is not unique — the namespace is what separates two types spelled the same way — and the assembly list is in LOAD order, so which `x` wins depends on which code path ran first and changes the moment another assembly contributing a same-named type is loaded. The same value of `typeName` can therefore resolve to different types in two runs of the same binary, and the run that picks the wrong one fails at the cast or the call, far from here. Compare `x.FullName` or `AssemblyQualifiedName`, which the namespace makes unique, or take the matches with `Where` and reject a set of more than one — `typeName` naming two types is a configuration error worth saying out loud, not a coin to flip.
  • Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly src/Shared/Core/Reflection/ReflectionUtilities.cs:87 — `x.Name == typeName` picks a type by its SIMPLE name out of `AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()`, and `FirstOrDefault` then takes whichever one comes first. Neither half of that is decided by this source. `Type.Name` is not unique — the namespace is what separates two types spelled the same way — and the assembly list is in LOAD order, so which `x` wins depends on which code path ran first and changes the moment another assembly contributing a same-named type is loaded. The same value of `typeName` can therefore resolve to different types in two runs of the same binary, and the run that picks the wrong one fails at the cast or the call, far from here. Compare `x.FullName` or `AssemblyQualifiedName`, which the namespace makes unique, or take the matches with `Where` and reject a set of more than one — `typeName` naming two types is a configuration error worth saying out loud, not a coin to flip.
AX2 · Stateful singletons · Stateful singleton · ×1
  • Stateful singleton: DiagnosticsProvider src/Shared/Diagnostics/DiagnosticsProvider.cs:10 — `DiagnosticsProvider` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_activitySource, _listener, _meter; e.g. `_activitySource` at line 28).
D10 · Test Quality · No assertions · ×1
  • No assertions: validate_service_dependencies tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.DependencyTests/DependencyTests.cs:14 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×1
  • Deprecated: FluentValidation.AspNetCore REDACTED:54 — FluentValidation.AspNetCore 11.3.0 — Legacy
D17 · Explicit Debt · BareSuppressMessage · ×1
  • BareSuppressMessage tests/Services/Catalogs/Vertical.Slice.Template.UnitTests/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProductTests.cs:19 — SuppressMessage — the suppression records no reason: either it carries no justification argument at all, or one that states nothing a reader can weigh ("OK", "By design"). A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited. Write what makes this site legitimately different — the invariant that holds, the framework contract that forces the shape — or remove the suppression and fix what it hides.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30) · ×1
  • TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30) src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:596 — TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26) src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs:41 — OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.CreateInfoForApiVersion has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 26) src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs:49 — ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:13 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:13-46 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:52-85 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:52-85 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:88-126 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:129-155 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs:13 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs:13-46 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:52-85 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:88-126 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:129-155 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (66 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (66 lines × 2) src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs:43 — src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiVersioningDocumentTransformer.cs:43-108 | src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/ConfigureSwaggerGenVersioningOptions.cs:51-116 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (48–51 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (48–51 lines × 2) src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:98 — src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:98-148 | src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:244-291 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Shared/Resiliency/DependencyInjectionExtensions.cs:98` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs:40 — src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs:40-68 | src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.cs:42-70 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20–30 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20–30 lines × 2) src/Shared/Resiliency/HttpClient/HttpClientExtensions.cs:24 — src/Shared/Resiliency/HttpClient/HttpClientExtensions.cs:24-53 | src/Shared/Resiliency/HttpClient/HttpClientExtensions.cs:78-97 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Shared/Resiliency/HttpClient/HttpClientExtensions.cs:24` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19–25 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (19–25 lines × 2) src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:22 — src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:22-46 | src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:105-123 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Shared/Core/Extensions/QueryableExtensions.cs:22` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16–19 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16–19 lines × 2) src/Shared/EF/StronglyTypedIdValueConverterSelector.cs:35 — src/Shared/EF/StronglyTypedIdValueConverterSelector.cs:35-53 | src/Shared/EF/StronglyTypedIdValueConverterSelector.cs:56-71 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:14 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:14-25 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:53-64 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:53-64 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:89-100 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs:130-141 — there are 5 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs:14 — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs:14-25 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:53-64 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:89-100 | src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs:130-141 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:10 — src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:10-21 | src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:13-23 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Shared/Web/Extensions/HeaderDictionaryExtensions.cs:10` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs:43 — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs:43-47 | src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:47-51 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D8 · Code Coverage · No test project references Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost · ×1
  • No test project references Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost src/Aspire/Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost/Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost.csproj — No test project in this repository references Vertical.Slice.Template.AppHost (1 production source file(s)), so `dotnet test` never loads it and no coverage tool can measure it — its code is absent from the 19.1% above rather than counted at zero. This is the whole assembly, not a gap within one: add a test project that references it (or a ProjectReference from an existing suite) and its coverage starts being measured.
D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 210 · ×1
  • CRAP 210: ModuleExtensions.AddModulesServices src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/ModuleExtensions.cs:13 — Cyclomatic 14 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 132 · ×1
  • CRAP 132: TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient src/Shared/Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:596 — Cyclomatic 11 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
DM4 · Rich vs anemic model · Anemic entity · ×1
  • Anemic entity: AuditableEntity src/Shared/Core/Domain/AuditableEntity.cs:5 — `AuditableEntity` is an aggregate/entity with 2 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Hollow method · ×1
  • Hollow method — returns a constant without doing the work src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/ProductConfigurations.cs:15 — `AddProductsModuleServices` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in.
P9 · Domain vs controller coverage · Low domain coverage · ×1
  • Low domain coverage — Domain coverage is 11%, against a bar of 50% for this row — the layer carrying the business rules is the least covered part of the codebase that matters most. Measured over the types this analyzer classifies as domain (aggregates, value objects, domain services), so code the classifier does not place in the domain is neither counted for nor against this figure.
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · DI scope created and never disposed · ×1
  • DI scope created and never disposed src/Shared/Web/Minimal/Extensions/MinimalApiExtensions.cs:70 — `builder.ServiceProvider.CreateScope()` (line 70) creates an `IServiceScope`, and it is bound to the local `scope`, which this method only reads through and never disposes. A scope owns every scoped service resolved from it — the `DbContext`, its connection, anything registered `AddScoped` — and releases them only when the scope itself is disposed; nothing here ever does, so each scope's services stay alive until the process ends. Create it with `using var scope = …CreateScope();` (or `await using` for `CreateAsyncScope`), or, when it must outlive the method, dispose it from the owning type's `Dispose`.
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method drops its ambient CancellationToken · ×1
  • Async method drops its ambient CancellationToken: WriteAsync src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/ProblemDetailsWriter.cs:16 — Its signature is fixed by the framework, and the token it carries (`context.HttpContext.RequestAborted`) reaches none of the calls here that take one — so an aborted request or a stopping host still waits for that work. Pass `context.HttpContext.RequestAborted` to them.
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method drops its CancellationToken · ×1
  • Async method drops its CancellationToken: ReadObjectResponseAsync src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.ConnectedServiceClients/Clients/CatalogsConectedServiceApiClient.g.cs:486 — Accepts a CancellationToken and never uses it, while it calls something that takes one — so a caller who cancels still waits for that work. Pass the token on (or, where the work must outlive the caller, start it without awaiting it so the choice is visible).
Minor — 156 finding(s)
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×87
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 62 more in this group — see findings.md.
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement · No seccomp profile · ×15
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:8 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:4 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:7 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:5 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:4 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:6 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:5 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:9 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:2 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:6 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:2 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:4 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:7 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:2 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
  • No seccomp profile REDACTED:4 — The workload runs a container with no seccomp profile in force (neither RuntimeDefault nor a Localhost profile, on the container or the pod), so Kubernetes runs it Unconfined. Seccomp blocks the syscalls a container never needs, shrinking the kernel attack surface a container escape would use.
D17 · Explicit Debt · DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity · ×13
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:411 — SA1101 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 497. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:426 — SA1413 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 745. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:432 — SA1516 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 751. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:435 — SA1118 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 743. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:441 — SA1128 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 794. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:755 — SA1128 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 794. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:444 — SA1509 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 800. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:447 — SA1115 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 790. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:459 — SA1502 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 748. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:462 — SA1009 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 741. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:465 — SA1111 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 742. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:701 — VSTHRD200 severity is assigned suggestion twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 705. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
  • DuplicateAnalyzerSeverity .editorconfig:754 — SA1127 severity is assigned none twice in the same [*.cs] section — here and again at line 793. The later assignment is the one that applies; this one is a duplicate to remove. — both lines say the same thing, so nothing about the build changes either way, but the repetition is what makes the next edit dangerous: whoever changes one of them will believe the change took effect, and the surviving copy will silently keep the old behaviour. Delete this one and leave a single entry for the rule.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Commented-out code · ×7
  • Commented-out code src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:35 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:36 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:37 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:38 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:39 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/Shared/EF/Interceptors/AuditInterceptor.cs:23 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
  • Commented-out code src/Shared/Web/ProblemDetail/RegistrationExtensions.cs:23 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
DM2 · Strongly-typed ids · Primitive id on a domain type · ×5
  • Primitive id on a domain type: ProductCreatedDomainEvent.CategoryId src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/ProductCreatedDomainEvent.cs:17 — `ProductCreatedDomainEvent.CategoryId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that.
  • Primitive id on a domain type: IEvent.EventId src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Domain/Events/IEvent.cs:13 — `IEvent.EventId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that.
  • Primitive id on a domain type: IMessage.MessageId src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Messaging/IMessage.cs:7 — `IMessage.MessageId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that.
  • Primitive id on a domain type: IMessage.CorrelationId src/Shared/Abstractions/Core/Messaging/IMessage.cs:8 — `IMessage.CorrelationId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that.
  • Primitive id on a domain type: Event.EventId src/Shared/Core/Domain/Events/Event.cs:8 — `Event.EventId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id: a dedicated single-field type wrapping the `Guid`, in whatever form your language spells that.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×4
  • Outdated: coverlet.msbuild tests/Directory.Packages.props:43 — coverlet.msbuild 6.0.2 → 10.1.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Swashbuckle.AspNetCore REDACTED:67 — Swashbuckle.AspNetCore 7.2.0 → 10.3.1 available (referenced by Shared).
  • Outdated: Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations REDACTED:69 — Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations 7.2.0 → 10.3.1 available (referenced by Shared).
  • Outdated: Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.ReDoc REDACTED:70 — Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.ReDoc 7.2.0 → 10.3.1 available (referenced by Shared).
X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×4
  • Duplicated predicate src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Clients/ConnectedService/CatalogsConnectedServiceClient.cs:85 — `getProductsByPageResponse is null || getProductsByPageResponse.Products is null || getProductsByPageResponse.Products.Items is null` appears character-identically in 3 files — src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Clients/ConnectedService/CatalogsConnectedServiceClient.cs, src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Clients/Kiota/CatalogsKiotaClient.cs, src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Shared/Clients/Rest/CatalogsRestClient.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs:20 — `i.IsGenericType && i.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(ICommandHandler<,>) && i.GetGenericArguments()[0] == typeof(TCommand)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerActivity.cs, src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Commands/CommandHandlerMetrics.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs:20 — `i.IsGenericType && i.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(IQueryHandler<,>) && i.GetGenericArguments()[0] == typeof(TQuery)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerActivity.cs, src/Shared/Diagnostics/CoreDiagnostics/Query/QueryHandlerMetrics.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs:56 — `parameter.Schema.Default == null && description.DefaultValue != null && description.DefaultValue is not DBNull && description.ModelMetadata …` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Shared/OpenApi/AspnetOpenApi/OpenApiDefaultValuesOperationTransformer.cs, src/Shared/OpenApi/Swashbuckle/SwaggerDefaultValuesOperationFilter.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation · Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted · ×3
  • Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted src/Shared/EF/EfTxBehavior.cs:35 — `LogDebug` at line 35 is called with an argument built by `JsonSerializer.Serialize(message)` (line 39), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
  • Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs:34 — `LogDebug` at line 34 is called with an argument built by `JsonSerializer.Serialize(message)` (line 37), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
  • Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted src/Shared/Validation/RequestValidationBehavior.cs:86 — `LogDebug` at line 86 is called with an argument built by `JsonSerializer.Serialize(message)` (line 89), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×2
  • No security response headers detected — None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is configured — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No security response headers detected src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/Program.cs:13 — This web host's pipeline is composed here and adds no security response header (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, a frame policy) to what it serves.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No app-layer HTTPS enforcement detected · ×2
  • No app-layer HTTPS enforcement detected — No UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts and no reverse-proxy signal — transport security is unverified at the app layer. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No app-layer HTTPS enforcement detected src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/Program.cs:13 — This web host's pipeline is composed here with no UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts, and nothing says a reverse proxy terminates TLS in front of it.
C2 · Access Controls · Thin authorization enforcement · ×1
  • Thin authorization enforcement — Authorization machinery exists but no [Authorize] usage and no imperative guard calls were found at handlers.
C3 · Audit Trail · Partial audit-trail evidence · ×1
  • Partial audit-trail evidence — An audit mechanism is present, but the trail is not yet complete — missing: an immutable audit-log / audit-trail type to write to, [Audited] per-entity coverage.
C4 · Data Retention · Partial data-retention evidence · ×1
  • Partial data-retention evidence — A retention mechanism is present, but the data-lifecycle is not yet complete — missing: a scheduled purge / cleanup job (PurgeOlderThan / CleanupJob), a documented retention period / data-expiry.
D21 · Naming Consistency · Typo in method name · ×1
  • Typo in method name: 'AddingSofDeletes' likely intends 'AddingSoftDeletes'. The word 'Sof' is a typo for 'Soft'. — Rename to 'AddingSoftDeletes' (symbols: Method: private void Shared.EF.EfDbContextBase.AddingSofDeletes(Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.ModelBuilder), Method: public void Shared.OpenApi.Swashbuckle.CorrelationIdHeaderOperationFilter.Apply(Microsoft.OpenApi.Models.OpenApiOperation, Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.SwaggerGen.OperationFilterContext))
D26 · Project Cohesion · Split Shared · ×1
  • Split Shared — Catch-all name at 8k LoC across 57 namespaces is a sprawling grab-bag. Suggested:
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D40 · Network Egress Confinement · No network policy · ×1
  • No network policy — No Kubernetes NetworkPolicy (or Cilium policy) found. Without one, every pod can talk to every other pod and reach out to the internet by default. Add a default-deny policy and open only the flows you need.
M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1
  • No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1
  • Logging is not universal — Only 2/5 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log). Of those 5, 2 ship a process this repository operates; the rest are libraries their consumer hosts, where the logging decision belongs to the host.
PF1 · Benchmark discipline · No performance benchmarks · ×1
  • No performance benchmarks — No benchmark suite was found by the two searches this check runs. FIRST, a BenchmarkDotNet package reference in any project file — every project the workspace loaded, plus a walk of project files on disk that never loaded, because a benchmark suite is exactly the project a partial load drops. SECOND, a script harness: a file whose name contains `benchmark` and ends `.py`, `.sh`, `.ps1`, `.bash`, `.rb`, `.js` or `.mjs`, credited ONLY when this repository's CI text also mentions benchmarks — a harness no pipeline runs is read as a fixture, deliberately. Neither search can see a benchmark suite in another ecosystem's idiom (a Go `testing.B` file, a JMH or criterion project, a pytest-benchmark run), so this is 'no benchmark found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none. Where code is performance-sensitive, a benchmark guards against silent regressions — but it's a bonus here, not a deduction.
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all async methods take a CancellationToken · ×1
  • Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 57/74 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Some async methods drop the CancellationToken they accept · ×1
  • Some async methods drop the CancellationToken they accept — 2 async method(s) await work their caller's cancellation cannot reach: a CancellationToken they hold (a parameter, or the one a framework-fixed signature carries) is never passed on, or the call is handed CancellationToken.None, default or an already-cancelled token. Forward the caller's token to that call.
X5 · Nullable reference types · Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score · ×1
  • Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score — ~1.4 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 70 suppression(s) across the 48520 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.
X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default in catch · ×1
  • Silent fallback default in catch src/Shared/Web/Extensions/QueryCollectionExtensions.cs:115 — `IsValidJson` swallows `JsonReaderException` into `return false;` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
Minor — 83 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×77
  • Outdated: AsyncAwaitBestPractices — AsyncAwaitBestPractices 9.0.0 → 10.0.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Meziantou.Analyzer — Meziantou.Analyzer 2.0.184 → 3.0.316 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Testing.Extensions.CodeCoverage — Microsoft.Testing.Extensions.CodeCoverage 18.1.0 → 18.12.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Testing.Extensions.TrxReport — Microsoft.Testing.Extensions.TrxReport 2.0.2 → 2.5.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.VisualStudio.Threading.Analyzers — Microsoft.VisualStudio.Threading.Analyzers 17.12.19 → 18.12.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Roslynator.Analyzers — Roslynator.Analyzers 4.12.10 → 5.0.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Roslynator.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers — Roslynator.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers 4.12.10 → 5.0.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Roslynator.Formatting.Analyzers — Roslynator.Formatting.Analyzers 4.12.10 → 5.0.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: xunit.v3.mtp-v2 — xunit.v3.mtp-v2 3.2.2 → 4.0.2 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.EndToEndTests).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.InMemory — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.InMemory 10.0.4 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.UnitTests).
  • Outdated: RichardSzalay.MockHttp — RichardSzalay.MockHttp 7.0.0 → 7.1.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.UnitTests).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Kiota.Bundle — Microsoft.Kiota.Bundle 1.16.1 → 2.1.2 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.ContractTests).
  • Outdated: NSwag.ApiDescription.Client — NSwag.ApiDescription.Client 14.2.0 → 14.7.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.ContractTests).
  • Outdated: EasyNetQ.Management.Client — EasyNetQ.Management.Client 3.0.0 → 3.0.1 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: FluentAssertions — FluentAssertions 7.0.0 → 8.11.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: FluentAssertions.Web — FluentAssertions.Web 1.7.0 → 3.0.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Meziantou.Extensions.Logging.InMemory — Meziantou.Extensions.Logging.InMemory 1.2.1 → 2.0.8 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing — Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing 10.0.4 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite 10.0.4 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: NSubstitute — NSubstitute 5.3.0 → 6.2.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Respawn — Respawn 6.2.1 → 7.0.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers — Testcontainers 4.1.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers.MongoDb — Testcontainers.MongoDb 4.1.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers.MsSql — Testcontainers.MsSql 4.1.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers.PostgreSql — Testcontainers.PostgreSql 4.1.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared).
  • + 52 more in this group — see findings.md.
D19 · Documentation Quality · XML-doc coverage · ×5
  • XML-doc coverage: Vertical.Slice.Template src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Vertical.Slice.Template.csproj — Vertical.Slice.Template: 6 % XML-doc coverage (7/116).
  • XML-doc coverage: Vertical.Slice.Template.Api src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api.csproj — Vertical.Slice.Template.Api: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • XML-doc coverage: Shared REDACTED — Shared: 6 % XML-doc coverage (51/882).
  • XML-doc coverage: Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients REDACTED — Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients: 89 % XML-doc coverage (107/120).
  • XML-doc coverage: Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults src/Aspire/Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults/Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults.csproj — Vertical.Slice.Template.ServiceDefaults: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/4).
D10 · Test Quality · Mock framework · ×1
  • Mock framework: NSubstitute — Vertical.Slice.Template.TestsShared references NSubstitute.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-a33420d5e9554021a2266d428639e9f5/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/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-a33420d5e9554021a2266d428639e9f5/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/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 .40artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnet—dotnet list Vertical.Slice.ApiTemplate.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json8artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy config --format json --quiet .524artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 64 file(s) — `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/Item/ProductsItemRequestBuilder.cs`, `src/ApiClients/Vertical.Slice.Template.KiotaClients/Clients/Api/V1/Products/ProductsRequestBuilder.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template.Api/CatalogsApiMetadata.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/CreatingProduct/v1/CreateProduct.cs`, `src/App/Vertical.Slice.Template/Products/Features/GettingProductById/v1/GetProductById.cs`, … (+59 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.0—
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signingprovenance—provenance: not applicable — This is a dotnet-new template — it produces no released artifact to attest. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM are deferred to the application you build from it (add SLSA provenance / cosign signing / an SBOM in your app's release pipeline).0—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—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—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — The repository ships application workloads but no cluster-governance resources (CRDs, admission webhooks, or a committed policy engine). Runtime threat-detection (Falco/Tetragon) and admission control (Kyverno/OPA-Gatekeeper/PodSecurity) are cluster-OPERATOR controls owned by the platform, not shipped by an application repo/chart — nothing for this repo to assess.0—
D43 · Malicious Dependenciesnone (no readable dependency manifest)—none (no readable dependency manifest): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).0—

Run 01a1617a-ec52-7def-b8d7-96fefe704366 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Appendix C — Personal-data map

Every field, property and record parameter whose name is conventional personal data — 1 field(s) across 1 category, each with an exact repo-relative file:line. This is the data inventory a compliance review starts from — right-to-erasure, retention, minimisation. Detected by NAME, from the C# syntax tree, with a deliberately specific identifier classifier — the same one the C1–C5 compliance cards use to decide whether personal data is present, so CardDefinition or FileName don't trip. Two caveats stated rather than glossed: those cards additionally require corroboration (a persistence/account signal, or two distinct PII categories) that this inventory deliberately does not, so it lists more than they gate on; and D32 Data Compliance shares nothing with it — that dimension is a separate semgrep ruleset for personal data leaking into logs, URLs and browser storage, and a clean D32 result says nothing about this list. Informational — it feeds no score.

Email — 1 field(s)
  • OpenApiOptions.ContactEmail src/Shared/OpenApi/OpenApiOptions.cs:9

Issues: 184 · Warnings: 609 · Recommendations: 156 · Info: 83 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 22-10-2026 @ 02:40 UTC.

Downloadable artifacts

Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif⬇ Health changelog .md