namastack/namastack-outbox

Executive summary

namastack/namastack-outbox scores 57 out of 100, but it is rated At risk while a critical security finding is open; the score itself is unchanged.

The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 51 and is rated Adequate. Its Security & performance tooling dimension scores 3 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing and to turn off Hibernate ddl-auto in production and let the versioned migrations own the schema, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 57 to about 60.

34 findings are critical: 20 in Static Analysis (SAST), nine in Dependency Vulnerabilities and five in IaC & Container Security.

Watchdog couldn't measure 11 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 24,959 lines, which would take an estimated 0.4 person-years, around €64,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 57 Adequate, capped by Dead Code Architecture 98 ★ Exemplary Maturity 56 Adequate, capped by Documentation accuracy Production Readiness 51 Adequate, capped by Security & performance tooling and Schema migrations Security and Compliance 75 Adequate, capped by Dependency Vulnerabilities and Supply-chain Provenance & Signing Accessibility 61 Adequate, capped by Keyboard semantics Performance 100 ★ Exemplary

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

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

Production Readiness 51 · counts for 46%Maturity 56 · counts for 25%Code Health 57 · counts for 14%Accessibility 61 · counts for 8%Security and Compliance 75 · counts for 4%Architecture 98 · counts for 2%Performance 100 · counts for 1%

If Production Readiness rose from 51 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 57 to about 60.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Product code 48%Tests 52%

New since the last survey: 30 findings

These 30 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 8 October 2026.

Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Large Files · namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx: 550 lines of code namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx
Dead Code · Dead file (~231 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/ReferenceOverview/index.tsx
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-modulith/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-multicaster/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/resources/application.yml
Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/resources/application.yml

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: 1 finding

This critical or serious finding was in the previous survey, on 8 October 2026, and is gone from this one.

Dead Code · Dead file (~230 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/ReferenceOverview/index.tsx

Rebuild cost: about €64,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€21,000 to €110,000, for 352 to 1,116 hours of work, about 0.4 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem	Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor	×0.8 at a score of 57. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size	Medium: 24,959 lines of product code

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

Top priorities

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

Raises the score by about 3 points · Medium effort · Security & performance tooling

Turn off Hibernate ddl-auto in production and let the versioned migrations own the schema.

Raises the score by about 3 points · Medium effort · Schema migrations

Reconcile the README with reality: namastack-outbox-docs/README.md documents the environment variable `USE_SSH`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md links to `/docs/contributing/`, but `docs/contributing` does not exist; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md documents the environment variable `NAMASTACK_OUTBOX_PROCESSING_EXECUTOR_CONCURRENCY_LIMIT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg` does not exist.

Raises the score by about 2 points · Medium effort · Documentation accuracy

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 €64,000 to build again, about 0.4 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 51 (Adequate). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.

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

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

If you do one thing first · First action

Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 3 points for medium effort. The next survey will show the change in the score.

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

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

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

122 modules, with 197 dependencies between them. 7 loops run through 32 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 82 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	1 example.modulith.order	2 outbox.context	3 outbox.runtime.OutboxRuntimeSettings	5 outbox.handler.discovery	6 outbox.handler.method.fallback	7 outbox.handler.method.handler	8 outbox.instance	9 outbox.instrumentation	10 performance.tooling.store	11 outbox.handler.registry	12 outbox.partition	13 performance.tooling.run	14 outbox.retry	15 performance.tooling.report	16 outbox.handler.assembly	17 outbox.handler.invoker	18 performance.tooling.collector	20 outbox.handler	21 outbox.processor	23 outbox.annotation	24 outbox.routing.selector	25 outbox.runtime	26 outbox.multicaster	27 outbox.routing.OutboxRoute	28 outbox.config	29 outbox.routing	30 outbox	31 outbox.kafka.KafkaOutboxRouting	32 outbox.rabbit.RabbitOutboxRouting	33 outbox.sns.SnsOutboxRouting	34 demo.customer	35 outbox.kafka	36 outbox.observability	37 outbox.rabbit	38 outbox.sns
1 example.modulith.order
2 outbox.context
3 outbox.runtime.OutboxRuntimeSettings
4 example.modulith.payment	1
5 outbox.handler.discovery																		2
6 outbox.handler.method.fallback																		2
7 outbox.handler.method.handler																		3
8 outbox.instance			1
9 outbox.instrumentation																											2
10 performance.tooling.store												5		3
11 outbox.handler.registry					1	5									1			1
12 outbox.partition							1
13 performance.tooling.run									1
14 outbox.retry			1							1
15 performance.tooling.report												5
16 outbox.handler.assembly				6	2	2							4
17 outbox.handler.invoker						1		2		2			3					2									5
18 performance.tooling.collector									1			2		5
19 performance.tooling.jdbc									3			7		3
20 outbox.handler								2		4			5		1	2											1
21 outbox.processor			3					7		1			2			2											12
22 performance.tooling												1					1
23 outbox.annotation													1					1
24 outbox.routing.selector																		5
25 outbox.runtime		1	6				1				1							2	1								2
26 outbox.multicaster			1																	1							1
27 outbox.routing.OutboxRoute																		1			2					2
28 outbox.config		2					5	2		2	7		3			4		1	3				1				25
29 outbox.routing																		2			2			1
30 outbox		1				1	18	1		1	15							4	1			2			2
31 outbox.kafka.KafkaOutboxRouting																					1			1		1						1
32 outbox.rabbit.RabbitOutboxRouting																					1			1		1								1
33 outbox.sns.SnsOutboxRouting																					1			1		1									1
34 demo.customer																											1
35 outbox.kafka																		3								2		1
36 outbox.observability								5																			2
37 outbox.rabbit																		3								2			1
38 outbox.sns																		3								2				1
39 demo								5					2					7													3	1		1	1
40 outbox.observability.OutboxObservationDocumentation																																	9

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 57% · Adequate · gated by R7 ·

The Good

D1 · Kotlin Cyclomatic Complexity 9.2 D2 · Kotlin Cognitive Complexity 9.0 D3 · Kotlin God Classes 9.8 D4 · Kotlin Code Duplication 9.5 D17 · Kotlin Explicit Debt 10.0 R1 · React / TS Type Safety 8.6 R10 · React / TS Code Duplication 9.2 R2 · React / TS Cyclomatic Complexity 9.0 R3 · React / TS Large Files 8.1 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 7.0 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 7.0 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 10.0

The Bad

X3 · Repo Exception handling 6.1

The Ugly

R7 · React / TS Dead Code 0.0

At a glance — Architecture · 98% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Kotlin Coupling 9.7 D6 · Kotlin Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D7 · Kotlin Architectural Integrity 10.0 D26 · Kotlin Project Cohesion 8.7 D35 · Kotlin Change Coupling 10.0 AX1 · Repo Captive dependencies 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.6 AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 R9 · React / TS Circular Imports 10.0

At a glance — Maturity · 56% · Adequate · gated by M4 ·

The Good

D15 · Kotlin Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · Kotlin Documentation Quality 9.4 D20 · Kotlin ADR Quality 8.7 D21 · Kotlin Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Kotlin Knowledge Freshness 9.8 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.8 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 7.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0

The Ugly

M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 51% · Adequate · gated by P3, P8 ·

The Good

D9 · Kotlin Test Distribution 10.0 D13 · Kotlin Secret Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 9.8 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 10.0 P5 · Repo DR & Backup 7.0 R5 · React / TS Dependency Freshness 8.4 R8 · React / TS Dependency Hygiene 8.0

The Bad

P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 6.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 5.0 R6 · React / TS Tooling 6.7

The Ugly

P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 3.0 P8 · Repo Schema migrations 3.0

At a glance — Security · 75% · Adequate · gated by D30, D36 ·

The Good

D28 · Kotlin Secrets (history) 10.0 D31 · Kotlin IaC & Container Security 7.1 D37 · Kotlin Vulnerability-disclosure Policy 10.0 D43 · Kotlin Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · Kotlin Platform End-of-Life 10.0 S1 · Repo Web-Security Posture 8.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0

The Bad

D29 · Kotlin Static Analysis (SAST) 6.4

The Ugly

D30 · Kotlin Dependency Vulnerabilities 1.1 D36 · Kotlin Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5

At a glance — Accessibility · 61% · Adequate · gated by AC4 ·

The Good

AC1 · Repo Text alternatives 10.0 AC2 · Repo Forms & labels 10.0 AC3 · Repo Page structure 10.0 AC5 · Repo ARIA correctness 10.0 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 10.0

The Ugly

AC4 · Repo Keyboard semantics 1.0 AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A05:2025 — Injection	24	High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	17	High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration	17	High / Critical

Roadmap

First, integrate automated security scanning into the CI pipeline to block regressions before they land, and disable automatic schema generation in production to rely exclusively on versioned migrations. Next, reconcile all documentation with the actual codebase to remove false references and update environment variable descriptions, while simultaneously establishing a changelog to track release contents. Finally, remove dead code and unused exports to reduce maintenance overhead and improve build efficiency.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.	+2.7 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Turn off Hibernate ddl-auto in production and let the versioned migrations own the schema.	+2.7 pts	Medium	Schema migrations
Reconcile the README with reality: namastack-outbox-docs/README.md documents the environment variable `USE_SSH`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md links to `/docs/contributing/`, but `docs/contributing` does not exist; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md documents the environment variable `NAMASTACK_OUTBOX_PROCESSING_EXECUTOR_CONCURRENCY_LIMIT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg` does not exist.	+2.4 pts	Medium	Documentation accuracy
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.	+1.7 pts	Medium	Release Hygiene
Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.	+1.7 pts	Medium	Dead Code
Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.	+1.4 pts	Medium	Keyboard semantics
Keep implementation types off the public surface (Kotlin: `internal`) so internals can change without breaking consumers.	+1.1 pts	Medium	Library API & versioning
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.	+1.0 pts	Medium	A11y enforcement

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 39 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 5% slop · 72% mixed · 23% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.0	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: Critical vulnerability: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.7	Slop	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.5	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt	7.2	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (30 lines × 3)
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx	7.4	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cyclomatic 31)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt	7.4	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (17 members, 50+ identical tokens)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java	7.4	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens)
namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt	7.8	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (11 lines × 2)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java	7.8	Mixed	Code Duplication: Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 16 shared lines)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt	7.8	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (17 members, 50+ identical tokens)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java	7.8	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt	7.8	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (12 lines × 2)
namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java	7.8	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (29 lines × 4)

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 — 34

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 — 96

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 — 46

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

Could not be resolved — 11

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. 79 of 84 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 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 — 84 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D7D9D13D15D17D19D20D21D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D37D43D44AC1AC2AC3AC4AC5AC6AC7AX1AX10AX2AX3AX5AX6M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P5P6P8PF3R1R10R2R3R5R6R7R8R9S1X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X4X5

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 161 of 176 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a1650e-aea7-7c66-9c48-301c372303f9.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT READ here — but this repository measures it: a Codecov configuration (codecov.yml, target 80%) and a coverage step in CI (`codecov/codecov-action`) shows that coverage is collected and tracked in your own CI. The built-in collector has no runner for this ecosystem (.kt, .java), so the analyzer could not read the number — a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not an unmeasured repo. Not scored. To have the real number read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.kt, .java) and this repository declares a JVM test suite (repository root, Gradle), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 49 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 17 dependency(ies) and leaving 39 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (10 contributor(s) across 500 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 92% of the history; the other 9 hold 0.9% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is an ADMISSION gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (build.gradle.kts), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here. D22 DOES collect the public API of every language in this tree, and admits a project only when its manifest makes that ecosystem's publication act in a form the marker recognises — so what is missing is not a collector but an admission rule for the publication act this repository makes, if it makes one. The remedy is a better discriminator for that marker — not a collector, and no change to the scan image can close it. The marker's rules are measured to refuse applications, so one refused repository is the rule working as calibrated; several are the evidence that it is too strict. For npm the surface is what a published package.json's entry points (exports, main, module, types) export, followed through the source; an entry that names build output the tree does not commit (dist/, build/) is not followed back to source, because only a tsconfig outDir/rootDir pair states that mapping and a bundler's input lives in executable configuration this engine does not evaluate.
D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
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. `namastack-outbox-api/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxChannelNameProvider.kt`, `namastack-outbox-api/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/retry/BackOffStrategy.kt`, `namastack-outbox-api/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/routing/OutboxRoutingConfigurer.kt`, `namastack-outbox-core/build.gradle.kts`, `namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRuntimeModeProvider.kt`, … (+8 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 DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — kafka Pulling kafka-ui Pulling kafka-ui Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden kafka Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: kafka Pulling kafka-ui Pulling kafka Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden kafka-ui Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check decides whether a handler's mutation is safe to re-run by recognising its persistence writes (a database save, a repository write, an event publish) and its guards. Those markers are .NET member names, so in this repository's language a write such as `repository.save(order)` is not recognised and a same-named call on an unrelated library type could be. The handlers were found; their idempotency was neither confirmed nor ruled out.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Kotlin is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Kotlin is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D7 Architectural Integrity: Layering is checked against detected/declared rules — an architecture whose boundaries live in convention or in code review, not in a rule a scanner can read, is not enforced here.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
AC4 Keyboard semantics: Keyboard semantics are inferred from markup attributes — interactivity wired purely in script, focus managed at runtime, and component-level handlers are invisible. A clean result means "no static keyboard-trap shape", not a keyboard-operability proof.
AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
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 (5): D19, D20, D21, D26, 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 Complexity9.2 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was VantaBackground.VantaBackground at 31.

VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cyclomatic 31)namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:40

What to do

Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cyclomatic 31). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.2 to about 10.0/10.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity9.0 / 10Strong✓ 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

1 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was VantaBackground.VantaBackground at 37.

VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cognitive 37)namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:40

What to do

Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cognitive 37). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 9.0 to about 10.0/10.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes9.8 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 over-large unit(s) detected — types, modules or files that carry too much.

FunctionTooLong: VantaBackground.VantaBackgroundnamastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:40

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.5 / 10Stronggated by 30 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

25 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 5 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 21 of the 30 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×2namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:65

Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) · ×2namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceEntityMapper.kt:37

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) · ×2namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:95

Members sharing a duplicated core (17 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:27

+ 20 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with JdbcOutboxInstanceEntityMapper.kt, CustomerRepository.kt. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling9.7 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

23 production modules (Gradle), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; edges a convention plugin adds from buildSrc or build-logic are not visible there; 1 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 15 of the 23 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: namastack-outbox:namastack-outbox-core

What to do

Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 97 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D7 · Architectural Integrity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the code respects its intended layering / architecture rules.

Method: Enforcement rung (Prevented/Verified/Documented) per checkable ADR via Roslyn, plus dependency cycles via the engine shared with D5/AX3. Deterministic, exact.

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

All 3 mechanizable ADR(s) are enforced: 2 by analyzers, 1 by tests. Dependency cycles not checked (no project-reference graph; where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d7_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

4 test methods: 4 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 deducted task-comment markers across 24959 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README is a strong overview of Namastack Outbox as an open-source Spring Boot transactional outbox implementation with ordering, retries, horizontal scaling, and observability. It links to documentation (docs/), quickstart, releases, community, license, and the namastack-outbox-docs directory, which documents that directory's website, examples, performance tests, ADRs, and more. The README also opens with a strong overview of what the project is and how it works before diving into installation. The repository's READMEs and architecture/Docs markdown files are complete and well-structured examples of the Namastack Outbox pattern across Java, JDBC, Kafka, MariaDB, MongoDB, PostgreSQL, and Spring Modulith use cases. Each example is a directory README that documents what it contains (Java code, handler implementations, shell commands) without an overarching repository overview, installation, or contribution guide — those belong to the root README and are judged there. The examples are clear, complete, and well-organized with headings, usage, configuration, and stable-handler-ID documentation. The repository's READMEs and architecture/Docs markdown files are clear and complete for the documented directories. Each example directory (rabbit-java, rabbit, retry, sns-java, sns) is well written: it states what the directory does, shows a descriptive overview of each component, gives concrete prerequisites/run commands with verbatim code blocks, and documents configuration in application.yml. The READMEs are focused on their own deployment tiers rather than the repository-level topics (overview/installation/usage/contributing/license), so those are judged against the root level.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D20 · ADR QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

Evaluated 3 ADR(s) individually; mean quality 8.7/10 (consistently complete and clear). 0 flagged with a specific gap.

What to do

Improve ADR Quality — currently 8.7/10. — Evaluated 3 ADR(s) individually; mean quality 8.7/10 (consistently complete and clear). 0 flagged with a specific gap.

Detailed fixes: d20_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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 build units (Gradle, npm) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)6.4 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

24 finding(s): 0 critical, 20 high, 1 medium, 3 low. 18 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 32 file(s) — `gradlew` (line 74, line 178), `namastack-outbox-docs/docusaurus.config.ts` (line 103, line 269), `namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx`, `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/gradlew` (line 74, line 178), `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/gradlew` (line 74, line 178), … (+27 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.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 18 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities1.1 / 10Critical✓ 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 1.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

14 finding(s): 4 critical, 5 high, 4 medium, 1 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 5 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Resolve the 3 Critical CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Critical vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security7.1 / 10Adequategated by 5 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

17 finding(s): 0 critical, 5 high, 12 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 12 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (12). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness9.8 / 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 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 of 107 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxInstanceRepository.kt. Counted over 107 of the 580 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned file · ×2namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:1

Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing2.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d37_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 27 platform declaration(s) and 17 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AC1 · Text alternatives10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether non-text content carries a text alternative — img/area/input[type=image] have alt, a meaningful svg has a title or aria-label, video has a captions track, and object/embed/canvas have a name or fallback content. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: every img/area/input[type=image] checked for alt, svg[role=img] for a title/aria-label, video for a captions <track>. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: image/media elements — img, area, input[type=image], svg, video, object, embed, canvas — across the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and dynamic-attribute elements are skipped. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is NOT read by any producer, so it contributes no element to this population; where such a frontend is present the card discloses it as an analyzer gap rather than scoring around it.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC2 · Forms & labels10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.

Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC3 · Page structure10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC4 · Keyboard semantics1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether interactive behaviour is keyboard-reachable — no click handler on a non-interactive element lacking a role, tabindex and key handler, no element the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer` without giving it any of the three, no unfocusable element whose only binding is a mouse enter/leave pair or a double-click, no positive tabindex, no href-less anchor, no placeholder-href (#/javascript) link acting as a button. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: click handlers on non-interactive elements lacking role+tabindex+key handler, positive tabindex values, and href-less anchors. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: elements that pose a keyboard-semantics question, in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) — a non-natively-interactive element carrying a click handler, a double-click or hover enter/leave binding, a pointer-only gesture on a tabindex="0" element, or `cursor: pointer` from the repo's own CSS; an href-less or placeholder-href (#, javascript:) anchor; and any element with a positive tabindex. Natively interactive elements used correctly (<button>, <a href>, form controls) are NOT in the population — there is nothing to judge — so a page of nothing but correct controls gives AC4 nothing to measure. Keyboard reachability is judged from the markup, never from a rendered page. ★ An interactive element declared in a tagged-template (html`…`) or hyperscript frontend is NOT in this population — no producer reads either — so an empty population is reported as an analyzer gap, never as "this repository has no interactive elements".

An <a href="#"> (or javascript:) with a click handler is a button dressed as a link — it announces the wrong role and stops working without JS. Use a <button> for an action. — namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/CookieConsent.tsx:61

What to do

Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC5 · ARIA correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: role values checked against the WAI-ARIA role set (abstract/invalid flagged), required ARIA state for a role, and aria-hidden on a focusable element. Deterministic, role/attribute level.

Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC6 · Visual & motion safety10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 16 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX10 · Code composition9.6 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX2 · Stateful singletons10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)7.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add a README to the 21 of 47 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 0.9 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation7.0 / 10Strong✓ 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.

What to do

Grow the ADR log (currently 5) — reach 8 to raise the maturity tier; document significant decisions as they're made.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

namastack-outbox-docs/README.md documents the environment variable `USE_SSH`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/README.md:32
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md links to `/docs/contributing/`, but `docs/contributing` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md:51
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md documents the environment variable `NAMASTACK_OUTBOX_PROCESSING_EXECUTOR_CONCURRENCY_LIMIT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:89
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:127
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:129
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-by-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-by-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:131
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:133
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-cpu.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-cpu.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:135
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-memory.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-memory.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:137
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/postgres.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/postgres.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:139
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:171
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:173
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:177
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:179
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:183
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:185
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:193
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:195
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:199
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:201
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:205
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:207
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:211
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:213
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-exec30-q0/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-exec30-q0/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:217
namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-exec30-q0/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-exec30-q0/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:219

What to do

Reconcile the README with reality: namastack-outbox-docs/README.md documents the environment variable `USE_SSH`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md links to `/docs/contributing/`, but `docs/contributing` does not exist; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md documents the environment variable `NAMASTACK_OUTBOX_PROCESSING_EXECUTOR_CONCURRENCY_LIMIT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist; namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg` does not exist.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

298/406 types (73%) declared in the published library are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — keep implementation types off the surface and expose only the intended API.

What to do

Keep implementation types off the public surface (Kotlin: `internal`) so internals can change without breaking consumers.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability9.8 / 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 30/32 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `namastack-outbox-performance-test/consumer`, `namastack-outbox-performance-test/tooling`.

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling3.0 / 10Weak✓ 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.

No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 12731 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Dependabot is configured but does not watch `github-actions`, `npm` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback10.0 / 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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).

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

What to do

Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P8 · Schema migrations3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether database schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than being auto-created from the model at startup.

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

This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema. (×19) — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/resources/application.yml:14, namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/resources/application.yml:14, namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/resources/application.yml:14, …

What to do

Turn off Hibernate ddl-auto in production and let the versioned migrations own the schema.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

R1 · Type Safety8.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.

Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.

What to do

Migrate the remaining .js/.jsx files to TypeScript.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R10 · Code Duplication9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.

Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.

REDACTED:75 · REDACTED:164 — 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. — REDACTED:75
namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:66 · namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:89 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:66
namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:30 · namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:68 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:30
namastack-outbox-docs/src/pages/index.tsx:25 · namastack-outbox-docs/src/pages/outbox/index.tsx:33 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — namastack-outbox-docs/src/pages/index.tsx:25

What to do

Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.

Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.

What to do

Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R3 · Large Files8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.

Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.

namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx has 550 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx:1

What to do

Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R5 · Dependency Freshness8.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — How outdated the npm dependencies are (a maturity signal). JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities).

Method: npm dependency staleness from manifest/registry metadata (a maturity signal; JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30, which answers dependency vulnerabilities for every ecosystem). Deterministic.

What to do

Bump outdated dependencies to current versions to limit upgrade debt.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R6 · Tooling6.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.

Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.

test ✓ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✓ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

What to do

Add eslint as package.json scripts and run them in CI.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R7 · Dead Code0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).

Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.

Unreachable from the 9 application, 2 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on `npm run build` — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make (×10) — namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx, namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/ReferenceOverview/index.tsx, namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx, …

What to do

Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R8 · Dependency Hygiene8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.

Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.

Declared in namastack-outbox-docs/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it. (×3)

What to do

Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.

Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

S1 · Web-Security Posture8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Only what this repository's own non-C# files could be read for was assessed — and because this repository commits the configuration that serves its own HTTP surface, that configuration could be read in full for the security response headers it sets. Nothing else in this dimension was assessed: the transport, cookie, input-validation and crypto controls are read from a source model that was not loaded for this repository’s language, so their absence here is not a finding about this repository.

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

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. This is reported because `vercel.json` configures this repository's static hosting, including its response headers, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.) — namastack-outbox-docs/vercel.json:1

What to do

Set security response headers on the surface this repository serves: an `add_header` directive per header in the nginx/Caddy/Apache config, a `_headers` / `vercel.json` / `netlify.toml` entry for a static host, or `helmet()` in the HTTP server. `Content-Security-Policy` is the one that pays for itself first — it is what contains an injected script once one reaches the page — followed by `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff` and a frame policy (`X-Frame-Options: DENY`, or CSP `frame-ancestors`). Where the app is served from a build container, the header configuration belongs in the image beside the built assets, so it ships with them rather than depending on where it lands.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation7.0 / 10Strong✓ 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.

`debug` at line 147 is called with an argument built by `partitions.sorted()` (line 147), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. Kotlin 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 debug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `isDebugEnabled` test, no `BuildConfig.DEBUG` flag, no trailing lambda (`logger.debug { … }`) the logger calls only when the level is on. — namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxProcessingScheduler.kt:147

What to do

In Kotlin, hand the logger a lambda it calls only when the level is on (`logger.debug { "rows: ${rows.joinToString()}" }` — kotlin-logging and Log4j 2's Kotlin API take one), or put the line behind `if (log.isDebugEnabled)` (`if (BuildConfig.DEBUG)` for a line only a debug build needs). A string template is not the fix on SLF4J or Timber: their message is a `String`, so every `joinToString` or `toJson` inside the `${…}` runs before the call is entered.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Code Health — Whether a `for (x in c)` or `c.forEach { … }` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a `mutableListOf`/`ArrayList`, `mutableMapOf`/`HashMap` or `mutableSetOf`/`HashSet` is a `java.util` collection on the JVM and is walked by its own fail-fast iterator, so a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is walking makes the next step throw `ConcurrentModificationException` and the remaining elements are never seen.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X3 · Exception handling6.1 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

`catch (_: Exception)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. — namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/instance/OutboxInstanceRegistry.kt:253
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) — namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:105, namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:133, namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:144

What to do

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded)

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X4 · Structured logging7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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.

`debug` at line 87 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string template with `$…` values in it, a concatenation or `String.format` — through SLF4J, log4j 2 or kotlin-logging, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.debug("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or with kotlin-logging `logger.atInfo { message = "Order moved"; payload = mapOf("order_id" to orderId, "status" to status) }`. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text. — namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/multicaster/OutboxEventMulticaster.kt:87
`debug` at line 91 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string template with `$…` values in it, a concatenation or `String.format` — through SLF4J, log4j 2 or kotlin-logging, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.debug("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or with kotlin-logging `logger.atInfo { message = "Order moved"; payload = mapOf("order_id" to orderId, "status" to status) }`. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text. — namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/multicaster/OutboxEventMulticaster.kt:91

What to do

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging

Do you agree with this assessment?

X5 · Nullable reference types10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether Kotlin's null safety is not undermined by not-null assertions — `String` cannot hold null and `String?` must be checked before use in every Kotlin module, and each `!!` is a run-time `NullPointerException` the author has told the compiler cannot happen.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 15 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (27%; ≈30% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 40 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

Dimension	WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria	Coverage
AC1 · Text alternatives	1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5	Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels	1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure	1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC4 · Keyboard semantics	2.1.1, 2.4.3	Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness	4.1.2	Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety	1.4.3, 2.4.7	Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcement	enforcement — no page criterion	Enforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 40 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	57%	Adequate — gated by R7	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture	98%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	56%	Adequate — gated by M4	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	51%	Adequate — gated by P3, P8	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	75%	Adequate — gated by D30, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility	61%	Adequate — gated by AC4	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.

Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

X7 Silent fallback defaults — 2 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not included — 47 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.

AX4 Dependency direction — not applicable to a CQRS architecture (the inward-dependency rule is for layered/clean styles)
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — kafka Pulling kafka-ui Pulling kafka-ui Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden kafka Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: kafka Pulling kafka-ui Pulling kafka Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden kafka-ui Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named column (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone_number, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no sensitive data whose changes an audit trail would record. If it does (through a store configured outside this repository, for instance), the trail belongs to wherever that data is stored.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a Room, JPA or MongoDB entity, an Exposed or Ktorm table, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (Room, Exposed, SQLDelight, Realm, JPA, JDBC, MongoDB, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
D10 Test Quality — ~26926 lines of test source are present (.kt, .java) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .kt suite was found but not re-run
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 49 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 17 dependency(ies) and leaving 39 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — Not scored — this repository's 17 declared JVM dependency coordinate(s) were read from its 49 Maven/Gradle manifest(s), but Maven Central could not be asked for the licence of 15 of them (HTTP 429 Too Many Requests from https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/boot/spring-boot-dependencies/4.1.1/spring-boot-dependencies-4.1.1.pom), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Aggregate roots were found in only one source directory (demo), which is a layered codebase, not two contexts. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — none of 3 ADRs are conformance-checkable — unverifiable.
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.kt), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 13 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (4 signals for this style, 3 needed — the count is met but a required primary signal is absent): 1 aggregate root(s) (types guarding their own state behind command methods — this language has no AggregateRoot base to inherit); 104 value object(s); 5 repository port(s) loading or saving an aggregate/entity; a DDD annotation stack (jMolecules/Axon @AggregateRoot/@Aggregate/@ValueObject — persistence @Entity does not count); a top-level namastack-outbox-examples/ tree: a library or framework whose examples are its consumers — these types are building blocks, not a domain
ED1 Event-Driven — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 1 event handler(s); 15 CQRS handler(s)
ED5 Idempotency — Not assessed, and this one is on us: 16 command handler(s) or message consumer(s) were found here, but this check does not yet recognise persistence writes in this repository's language. Idempotency was neither confirmed nor ruled out — this is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (an Axon event-sourcing framework (@Aggregate/@CommandHandler/@EventSourcingHandler annotations))
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JVM, JavaScript/TypeScript source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `@Benchmark` in a Java, Kotlin or Scala file importing JMH or kotlinx-benchmark, Jetpack Benchmark's `measureRepeated` in a file importing androidx.benchmark, or JMH/kotlinx-benchmark/androidx.benchmark in a pom.xml, Gradle or sbt build, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Kotlin code has 17,963 production line(s), 0 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
R4 Test Coverage — the JS/TS workspace (20 production file(s)) has no JavaScript/TypeScript test, but it is 8.69% of this repository's production source and the other 91.31% carries 26,926 line(s) of test code this pass cannot read — an incidental frontend's reachability is not the repository's test posture, so it is not scored as one
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Kotlin was read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller (Ktor, OkHttp's newCall or a URL stream, from a suspend function) — a Kotlin request outside a suspend function has no caller's cancellation to honour
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
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 — 34 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical vulnerability · ×1

REDACTED

Serious — 96 finding(s)

P8 · Schema migrations · Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations · ×19

Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/resources/application.yml:12 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-modulith/src/main/resources/application.yml:13 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-multicaster/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/resources/application.yml:12 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/resources/application.yml:12 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/resources/application.yml:12 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.
Schema created by Hibernate ddl-auto outside the migrations namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/resources/application.yml:14 — This repository versions its schema (Flyway), but Hibernate ddl-auto here builds or alters the schema from the model as well, outside that history — the two paths can disagree about the shape, and a change made this way is never a reviewed migration. Turn it off and let Flyway own the schema.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×12

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×3

Swallowed exception (empty catch) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:105 — 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) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:133 — 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) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:144 — 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.

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

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:65 — namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:65-75 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:305-315 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:100 — namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:100-110 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordRepository.kt:339-349 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

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

Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceEntityMapper.kt:37 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceEntityMapper.kt:37-46 | namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxInstanceEntityMapper.kt:37-46 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxInstanceEntityMapper.kt:37-46 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:32 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:32-41 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:32-41 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:32-41 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:32` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (7 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:95 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:95-101 | namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:95-101 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:90-96 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` and `namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:106 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:106-112 | namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:106-112 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:101-107 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` and `namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:106` 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 · Members sharing a duplicated core (17 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2

Members sharing a duplicated core (17 members, 50+ identical tokens) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:22-40 — These 17 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 17 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 17 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (17 members, 50+ identical tokens) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:21-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:23-44 — These 17 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 17 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 17 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:27 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:27-46 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:27-46 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:27-46 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:27-46 — 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.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:24 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:24-44 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:24-44 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:24-44 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:24-44 — 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.

AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Link used as a button (placeholder href) · ×1

Link used as a button (placeholder href) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/CookieConsent.tsx:61 — An <a href="#"> (or javascript:) with a click handler is a button dressed as a link — it announces the wrong role and stops working without JS. Use a <button> for an action.

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

Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 16 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cyclomatic 31) · ×1

VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cyclomatic 31) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:40 — VantaBackground.VantaBackground has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 31 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 8 function items inside it that branch (shouldEnableVanta, a function literal at line 80, a function literal at line 101, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cognitive 37) · ×1

VantaBackground.VantaBackground (cognitive 37) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:40 — VantaBackground.VantaBackground has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (18 pts), error handling 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 5, ternaries 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 8). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 37 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 8 function items inside it that branch (a function literal at line 80, shouldEnableVanta, a function literal at line 101, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.

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

REDACTED

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×1

FunctionTooLong: VantaBackground.VantaBackground namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx:40 — FunctionTooLong — VantaBackground runs 115 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 15 over it, 1.15× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (30 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (30 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:56 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:56-85 | namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:56-85 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:51-80 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` and `namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:32 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:32-46 | namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:32-46 | namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:27-41 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` and `namastack-outbox-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordEntityMapper.kt:32` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (7 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordRepository.kt:488 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordRepository.kt:488-494 | namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordRepository.kt:510-516 — 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 `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordRepository.kt:488` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordRepository.kt:509` calls `param` and `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxRecordRepository.kt:487` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

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

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:267 — namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:267-271 | namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:284-288 — 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 `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:267` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:283` calls `param` and `namastack-outbox-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/JdbcOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:266` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 16 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 16 shared lines) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:20 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:20-39 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/RabbitOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:41-60 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/SnsOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:23-42 — These 3 members are variants of one another: a block of 16 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 3 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 3 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 17) · ×1

Duplicated block (21 lines × 17) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:22-42 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:24-44 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (17 lines × 17) · ×1

Duplicated block (17 lines × 17) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24-40 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.kt:24` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:29 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:29-40 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:29-40 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRepository.kt:29` 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 (9 lines × 11) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 11) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:18-28 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt:13-21 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/GenericOutboxHandler.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (10 lines × 14) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 14) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11-20 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:15-24 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.kt:11` 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 (10 lines × 13) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 13) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:8-17 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:12-21 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:11` calls `Observed` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.kt:6` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 17) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 17) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-flyway-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-h2/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mariadb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-mysql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-postgresql/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-retry/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sqlserver/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jdbc/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-table-prefix-jpa/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:45-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-tracing/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt:47-53 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-annotation/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-fallback/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.kt` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.kt:18 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.kt:18-29 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/RabbitOutboxRoutingConfiguration.kt:34-45 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/SnsOutboxRoutingConfiguration.kt:18-29 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.kt:18` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (20 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (20 lines × 4) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:25 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:25-44 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:25-44 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:25-44 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:25-44 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (19 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (19 lines × 4) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:28 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:28-46 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:28-46 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:28-46 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java:28-46 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/DemoApplication.java` as WHOLE FILES: 96% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (17 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.java:15 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/ExternalBroker.java:15-31 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/ExternalMailService.java:15-31 — 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:24 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:24-39 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/RabbitOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:45-60 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/SnsOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:27-42 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/KafkaOutboxRoutingConfiguration.java:24` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (29 lines × 4) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-51 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (22 lines × 8) · ×1

Duplicated block (22 lines × 8) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRegisteredEvent.java:12-33 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRegisteredEvent.java:12-33 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRegisteredEvent.java:12-33 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java:23-51 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerRegisteredEvent.java:12-33 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/Customer.java` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:47 — namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:47-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:47-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-rabbit-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:47-56 | namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-sns-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java:47-56 — before extracting anything, compare `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java` and `namastack-outbox-examples/namastack-outbox-example-kafka-java/src/main/java/io/namastack/demo/customer/CustomerService.java` as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: namastack-outbox:namastack-outbox-core — namastack-outbox:namastack-outbox-core: abstractness 0.08, instability 0.08, distance 0.84 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 12 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (23 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:75 — REDACTED:75 · REDACTED:164 — 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.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:66 — namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:66 · namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:89 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:30 — namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:30 · namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/resources/schema/mongodb-setup.js:68 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) namastack-outbox-docs/src/pages/index.tsx:25 — namastack-outbox-docs/src/pages/index.tsx:25 · namastack-outbox-docs/src/pages/outbox/index.tsx:33 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R3 · Large Files · namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx · ×1

namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx: 550 lines of code namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx:1 — namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx has 550 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.

R6 · Tooling · No lint script · ×1

No lint script — test ✓ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✓ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~579 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~579 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/MarketingPage/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~231 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~231 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/ReferenceOverview/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~198 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~198 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VantaBackground.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~110 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~110 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/HomepageFeatures/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~83 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~83 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/HowItWorks/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~67 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~67 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/HomepageContent/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~49 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~49 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/CookieConsentApiControls.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~45 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~45 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/ModulithPromotion/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~40 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~40 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/SponsorSection/index.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~26 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~26 LoC) namastack-outbox-docs/src/components/VersionedCode.tsx — no import path from any entry point (9 application, 2 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@docusaurus/module-type-aliases' · ×1

Unused dependency '@docusaurus/module-type-aliases' — Declared in namastack-outbox-docs/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.

R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@docusaurus/theme-live-codeblock' · ×1

Unused dependency '@docusaurus/theme-live-codeblock' — Declared in namastack-outbox-docs/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.

R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@docusaurus/theme-search-algolia' · ×1

Unused dependency '@docusaurus/theme-search-algolia' — Declared in namastack-outbox-docs/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.

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

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/instance/OutboxInstanceRegistry.kt:253 — `catch (_: Exception)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.

Minor — 46 finding(s)

M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×26

README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/README.md:32 — namastack-outbox-docs/README.md documents the environment variable `USE_SSH`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md:51 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/sponsor.md links to `/docs/contributing/`, but `docs/contributing` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:89 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md documents the environment variable `NAMASTACK_OUTBOX_PROCESSING_EXECUTOR_CONCURRENCY_LIMIT`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:127 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:129 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-total.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:131 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-by-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/throughput-by-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:133 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:135 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-cpu.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-cpu.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:137 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-memory.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/consumer-memory.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:139 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/postgres.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-vthreads-limit30/postgres.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:171 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:173 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-5000/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:177 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:179 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-7500/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:183 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:185 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-baseline-10000/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:193 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:195 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-poll100/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:199 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:201 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:205 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:207 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch500/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:211 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:213 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/backlog.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-6instances-batch1000/backlog.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md:217 — namastack-outbox-docs/docs/reference/performance-tuning.md links to `/img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-exec30-q0/producer-vs-consumer.svg`, but `img/performance-tuning/docs-refresh-20260604T182233Z-tuned-10000-4inst-exec30-q0/producer-vs-consumer.svg` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
+ 1 more in this group — see findings.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned file · ×2

Orphaned file namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxInstanceRepository.kt:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxPartitionAssignmentRepository.kt:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.

X4 · Structured logging · Interpolated log message defeats structured logging · ×2

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/multicaster/OutboxEventMulticaster.kt:87 — `debug` at line 87 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string template with `$…` values in it, a concatenation or `String.format` — through SLF4J, log4j 2 or kotlin-logging, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.debug("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or with kotlin-logging `logger.atInfo { message = "Order moved"; payload = mapOf("order_id" to orderId, "status" to status) }`. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/multicaster/OutboxEventMulticaster.kt:91 — `debug` at line 91 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string template with `$…` values in it, a concatenation or `String.format` — through SLF4J, log4j 2 or kotlin-logging, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.debug("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or with kotlin-logging `logger.atInfo { message = "Order moved"; payload = mapOf("order_id" to orderId, "status" to status) }`. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text.

X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default in catch · ×2

Silent fallback default in catch namastack-outbox-performance-test/tooling/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/performance/tooling/report/PrometheusClient.kt:27 — `queryRange` swallows every exception into `emptyList()` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it propagate. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment in the catch or in the KDoc, and the row stops firing.
Silent fallback default in catch namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/instance/OutboxInstanceRegistry.kt:253 — `getApplicationPort` swallows every exception into `8080` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it propagate. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment in the catch or in the KDoc, and the row stops firing.

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 15 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 8.7/10. The most over is `namastack-outbox-core` (7021 LoC, 161 module-visible types across 20 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Low CVE · ×1

REDACTED

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1

Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 2 of 107 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 107 of the 580 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxInstanceRepository.kt, namastack-outbox-mongodb/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/MongoOutboxPartitionAssignmentRepository.kt. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

Large public API surface — 298/406 types (73%) declared in the published library are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — keep implementation types off the surface and expose only the intended API.

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 30/32 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `namastack-outbox-performance-test/consumer`, `namastack-outbox-performance-test/tooling`.

P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1

No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 12731 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1

No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×1

No security response headers detected namastack-outbox-docs/vercel.json:1 — 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. This is reported because `vercel.json` configures this repository's static hosting, including its response headers, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.)

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation · Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted · ×1

Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxProcessingScheduler.kt:147 — `debug` at line 147 is called with an argument built by `partitions.sorted()` (line 147), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. Kotlin 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 debug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `isDebugEnabled` test, no `BuildConfig.DEBUG` flag, no trailing lambda (`logger.debug { … }`) the logger calls only when the level is on.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-15f6419c5edf4f41882bc94f1faccdaf/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-15f6419c5edf4f41882bc94f1faccdaf/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	24	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	14	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	17	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 13 file(s) — `namastack-outbox-api/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxChannelNameProvider.kt`, `namastack-outbox-api/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/retry/BackOffStrategy.kt`, `namastack-outbox-api/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/routing/OutboxRoutingConfigurer.kt`, `namastack-outbox-core/build.gradle.kts`, `namastack-outbox-core/src/main/kotlin/io/namastack/outbox/OutboxRuntimeModeProvider.kt`, … (+8 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a1650e-aea7-7c66-9c48-301c372303f9 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 57% · Adequate · gated by R7 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 98% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 56% · Adequate · gated by M4 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 51% · Adequate · gated by P3, P8 ·

At a glance — Security · 75% · Adequate · gated by D30, D36 ·

At a glance — Accessibility · 61% · Adequate · gated by AC4 ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts