Event-driven database for projection materialization
Public report — cloud-shapes, published 19 Jun 2026. Concrete security findings (CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are hidden in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Watchdog 19-06-2026 @ 22:06 UTC Public
Code Health Audit

Neuroglia-Io/cloud-Shapes

35% Poor

Small · 11,905 LoC · 7 projects · rebuild ~0.1 person-years · weakest lens: Readiness (21%)

Grounded in facts. Every number here is computed, not narrated — reproducible, tool-backed, and traceable to a line of code. How to trust this ▸

69/73dimensions tool-verifieddeterministic · confidence 1.0 · 4 LLM-assisted, advisory
62findings with an exact file:lineof 99 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
73/96dimensions across the health lenses11905 LoC · 7 projects — wide & deep

Executive summary

Read through the Preview lens: this repo is pre-1.0 / in development, so the colour bands are relaxed to what a preview needs — *green* means good enough for a preview, not yet production-stable. Code correctness and security stay near-strict even here; the score itself is absolute and comparable across repos.

neuroglia-io/cloud-shapes carries serious risk (35%). Several issues below can materially affect reliability, security, or the cost of change and warrant near-term attention.

It is strongest in Event-Driven (100%) — its messaging keeps components properly decoupled. Code Health (77%) is solid too.

The area that most needs attention is Readiness (21%) — operating, monitoring and recovering the system safely is harder. Security (34%) is the next concern — exposure to security and compliance incidents is elevated.

Leadership focus, highest impact first: Protect endpoints by default-deny (Access Controls); Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions… (Architecture documentation); security response headers (Content-Security-Policy (Web-Security Posture).

For scale: Small (~11,905 production lines); rebuilding it from scratch would take roughly ~0.1 person-years (~1 engineer). Approximate, ±~30%.

It builds on a genuinely strong Event-Driven foundation (100%); the priorities above are the highest-leverage way to bring the rest up to that level.

Code composition — where the lines go
Business logic 15%Plumbing 85%
New since the last scan (4+)

4 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-06-19) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

  • D3 · TooManyMethods: View.razor › __RazorCode_View_1 src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/View.razor
  • D22 · Duplicate intent: Both types expose a GetTypes() method that appears to return the same kind of data (list of strings), but are split across two different types (ProjectionTypes vs Projections).
  • D22 · Inconsistent naming for enumeration helpers: The Problems namespace uses AsEnumerable() for all three subtypes, which is consistent, but the subtypes themselves (Types, Titles, Statuses) are distinct domains, so this is actually consistent. However, the use of AsEnumerable() for static constants is a minor style inconsistency with other patterns in the codebase (e.g., CloudEventValueResolutionStrategy.AsEnumerable()).
  • D22 · Inconsistent verb usage in CRUD operations: The API uses 'Create', 'Get', 'List', 'Update', 'Patch', 'Delete'. While common, 'Get' and 'List' are specific HTTP verbs, whereas 'Create', 'Update', 'Patch', 'Delete' are action-oriented. More importantly, 'Get' is used for single item retrieval, but 'List' is used for collections. This is a minor inconsistency in naming convention (Get vs Fetch/Find).

A full-fidelity diff against the previous run's complete recorded findings — line-move tolerant: a finding that only shifted line counts as unchanged, only genuinely new titles/files surface here.

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €4,400–€21,000
Cost to rebuild€4,400–€21,000 (0.1 person-years (73–226 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexityHigh — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor0.7× (at 35% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shapeSmall · 72% boilerplate · 13% straight-line · 15% branching logic

This codebase represents roughly ~0.1 person-years of build effort (about ~€13,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 21% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain High (×1.5) — service/app, CQRS, event-driven integration × a 0.7× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30%. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

The highest-leverage moves; the full ranked list is in the Roadmap below.

1
Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler.
+4.2 pts · Medium effort · Access Controls
2
Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
+2.5 pts · Medium effort · Architecture documentation
3
Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
+2.3 pts · Medium effort · Web-Security Posture

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Value concentrated against a weak lens · High · Value at risk
This is a Small asset (~0.1 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Readiness at 21%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
Evidence: valuation: Small, ~0.1 person-years rebuild (11,905 LoC) · weakest lens: Readiness 21%
→ Direct remediation budget at Readiness first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.
Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler. The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler.

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

arch CloudShapes.Api Api CloudShapes.Application Application CloudShapes.Api->CloudShapes.Application CloudShapes.Dashboard Dashboard CloudShapes.Api->CloudShapes.Dashboard CloudShapes.Api.Client Client CloudShapes.Integration Integration CloudShapes.Api.Client->CloudShapes.Integration CloudShapes.Application->CloudShapes.Integration CloudShapes.Dashboard->CloudShapes.Api.Client CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement StateManagement CloudShapes.Dashboard->CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement CloudShapes.Data Data CloudShapes.Integration->CloudShapes.Data

At a glance — Code Health · 77% · Healthy

At a glance — Architecture · 75% · Healthy

At a glance — Maturity · 50% · Fair · gated by D34, M2

At a glance — Readiness · 21% · Poor · gated by D8, D9, P3, P5, P7

At a glance — Security · 34% · Poor · gated by D36, C2

At a glance — Event-Driven · 100% · Exemplary

At a glance — Accessibility · 50% · Fair

At a glance — Performance · 72% · Healthy

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration3High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components2High / Critical

Roadmap

First, secure all endpoints by implementing default-deny access controls and role-based authorization. Next, document key architectural decisions and establish a record of rationale. Then, harden the web security posture by adding essential response headers and enforcing accessibility standards in the toolchain. Finally, introduce benchmarking for hot paths to prevent performance regressions.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler.+4.2 ptsMediumAccess Controls
Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.+2.5 ptsMediumArchitecture documentation
Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.+2.3 ptsMediumWeb-Security Posture
Add a BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations), and run it in CI to catch regressions.+1.7 ptsMediumBenchmark discipline
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y (or vuejs-accessibility), assert with jest-axe / playwright-axe in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.+1.3 ptsMediumA11y enforcement
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.+0.6 ptsLowADR Quality
Resolve the 2 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with CloudShapesApiClientOptions.cs, ProjectionTypesApiClient.cs.+0.6 ptsLowComment Value
Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.+1.2 ptsMediumForms & labels

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 30 files carrying findings, judged against the Preview bar: 0% slop · 10% mixed · 90% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
src/CloudShapes.Api/Dockerfile5.1MixedIaC & Container Security: High IaC: DS-0017
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/Store.cs6.7MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs6.9MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs7.2Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: BsonDocumentExtensions.Find (cognitive 33)
src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs7.2Near-cleanChange Coupling: Change coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionType.cs
src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/Repository.cs7.4Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: Repository.AddAsync (cognitive 26)
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/StoreFactory.cs7.8Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: StoreFactory.FindAndMapReducersPerState (cognitive 19)
src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs7.8Near-cleanChange Coupling: Change coupling: CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs
src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/ProjectionsApiClient.cs8.0Near-cleanChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: ProjectionsApiClient.cs ↔ CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs
src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/Interfaces/IProjectionsApiClient.cs8.0Near-cleanChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: IProjectionsApiClient.cs ↔ CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs
src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/IDictionaryExtensions.cs8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: IDictionaryExtensions.Find (cognitive 33)
src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/ProjectionTypes/CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.cs8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 31)
src/CloudShapes.Application/Extensions/QueryOptionsExtensions.cs8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: QueryOptionsExtensions.BuildFilter (cognitive 26)
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/CreateUpdateEditorModal/UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor › OnEditorInputChangedAsync (cognitive 25)
src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/ProjectionTypes/MigrateProjectionTypeSchemaCommandHandler.cs8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: MigrateProjectionTypeSchemaCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 19)
src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/DatabaseProvisioner.cs8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: DatabaseProvisioner.PrioritizeProjectionTypes (cognitive 19)
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Editor/View.razor8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: View.razor › OnProjectionTypeEditorAsync (cognitive 16)
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/View.razor8.5Near-cleanGod Classes: TooManyMethods: View.razor › __RazorCode_View_1
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/ProjectionsNav/Store.cs8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (65 lines × 2)
src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Indexes/Store.cs8.5Near-cleanCode Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 4)

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. 69 of 73 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 73 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D8D9D12D13D14D15D16D17D18D19D20D21D22D24D26D27D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D37AC1AC2AC3AC4AC5AC7AX1AX10AX2AX3AX5AX6AX9C2ED1ED2ED3ED4ED5GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P5P6P7P8PF1PF2PF3S1X1X2X3X4X5

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions
  1. Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 62 of 99 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
jscpdCode duplication✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.301✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.301✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementQwen/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 019ee1ec-1b76-7e2e-a7a3-2773f7db5dd6.

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.

  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.

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 (jscpd) — it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (EF migration scaffolds, *.Designer.cs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only; the generated footprint is reported separately under Solution Shape.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the suite (`dotnet test --collect`) inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (EF migrations, designer files, snapshots) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement.
  • D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
  • D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and the advisory database — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen.
  • 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.
  • 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, and component-wrapped fields (e.g. a <TextField>) are skipped. A clean result is "no unlabelled native 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. 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.
  • 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.
  • AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
  • ED5 Idempotency: Idempotency is judged from the handler body's visible writes and guards — a guard enforced by a database unique constraint, a broker's exactly-once delivery, or a domain method whose no-op-when-applied logic the scan can't follow may read as at-risk; the at-risk candidates are confirmed by a SAMPLED LLM verdict (advisory, not exhaustive) and degrade to heuristic-only when no model is configured. It flags the at-least-once double-apply SHAPE, not a runtime proof of a duplicate effect.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (7): D19, D20, D21, D22, D24, ED5, M4 (model: Qwen/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score (documentation, ADR quality, naming, comment value, onboarding) — D25 sets the ADR-conformance fraction over sampled code, D22 judges API accuracy over a sample. These are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity7.9 / 10Healthy✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 7.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

15 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was BsonDocumentExtensions.Find at 33.

BsonDocumentExtensions.Find (cognitive 33)src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:41
IDictionaryExtensions.Find (cognitive 33)src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/IDictionaryExtensions.cs:30
CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 31)src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/ProjectionTypes/CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.cs:63
QueryOptionsExtensions.BuildFilter (cognitive 26)src/CloudShapes.Application/Extensions/QueryOptionsExtensions.cs:29
Repository.AddAsync (cognitive 26)src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/Repository.cs:146

+ 10 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 BsonDocumentExtensions.Find (cognitive 33) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with BsonDocumentExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 IDictionaryExtensions.Find (cognitive 33) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with IDictionaryExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 31) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D3 · God Classes9.6 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 god class(es) detected.

TooManyMethods: View.razor › __RazorCode_View_1src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/View.razor:0

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D4 · Code Duplication9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

5 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (65 lines × 2)src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/ProjectionsNav/Store.cs:66
Duplicated block (9 lines × 4)src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Indexes/Store.cs:77
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:99
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3)src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/JsonSchemaExtensions.cs:36
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2)src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/Feature.cs:61

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D5 · Coupling7.7 / 10Healthy✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 7.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

Off the main sequence: CloudShapes.Data · ×2

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)8.2 / 10Healthy✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

5 of 33 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: ProjectionListStore (LCOM4 8) · ×5src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/Store.cs:23

What to do

  1. Resolve the 5 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with Store.cs (3), MonacoEditorHelper.cs, StatefulComponent.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
  2. Enforce Cohesion (LCOM4) in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D8 · Code Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

No automated tests — the solution has no test code.

No automated tests

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No test projects found.

No tests found

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

11 outdated, 0 vulnerable, 0 deprecated packages.

Outdated: MongoDB.Driver · ×11

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 of 31 packages use a banned license.

Licenses scanned

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · 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.

D16 · Bus Factor5.7 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").

Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 5.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

43 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/Repository.cs, held by charles.davernas@neuroglia.io.

Small-team knowledge concentration
Off-boarding risk: charles.davernas@neuroglia.io

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Small-team knowledge concentration finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 deducted debt markers + 0 dead symbols across 11905 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 9.9.

TodoComment · ×4src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:126
Justified suppression · ×3src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:124

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

7 projects, 184 .cs files, 11905 hand-written lines of code (11905 production / 0 test), 15 inter-project edges.

CloudShapes.Application (Production)src/CloudShapes.Application/CloudShapes.Application.csproj
CloudShapes.Api (Production)src/CloudShapes.Api/CloudShapes.Api.csproj
CloudShapes.Data (Production)src/CloudShapes.Data/CloudShapes.Data.csproj
CloudShapes.Dashboard (Production)src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/CloudShapes.Dashboard.csproj
CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement (Production)src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement.csproj

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D19 · Documentation Quality / 10Healthy◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Healthy / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The project features excellent internal code documentation with 100% XML-doc coverage across all modules, indicating a strong commitment to inline API documentation. The primary README is well-structured, visually appealing, and clearly explains the event-driven architecture. However, the documentation suffers from a lack of external architectural or design documents, and the main README, while good, lacks a clear 'Getting Started' or 'Installation' section despite having a header for it. The secondary README is a presentation summary, which is useful but not critical for end-users.

XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Application · ×7src/CloudShapes.Application/CloudShapes.Application.csproj

What to do

  1. Improve Documentation Quality — currently 7.0/10. — The project features excellent internal code documentation with 100% XML-doc coverage across all modules, indicating a strong commitment to inline API documentation. The primary README is well-structured, visually appealing, and clearly explains the event-driven architecture. However, the documentation suffers from a lack of external architectural or design documents, and the main README, while good, lacks a clear 'Getting Started' or 'Installation' section despite having a header for it. The secondary README is a presentation summary, which is useful but not critical for end-users.

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

D20 · ADR Quality / 10Critical◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Critical / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

D21 · Naming Consistency / 10Exemplary◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

1 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

The state and store for the ProjectionType editor are named inconsistently. One uses 'State' and the other uses 'Store', suggesting they serve related but distinct roles in the state management pattern.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D22 · Internal API Consistency / 10Healthy◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Healthy / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

3 API inconsistencies across 70 exposed types.

Duplicate intent: Both types expose a GetTypes() method that appears to return the same kind of data (list of strings), but are split across two different types (ProjectionTypes vs Projections).
Inconsistent naming for enumeration helpers: The Problems namespace uses AsEnumerable() for all three subtypes, which is consistent, but the subtypes themselves (Types, Titles, Statuses) are distinct domains, so this is actually consistent. However, the use of AsEnumerable() for static constants is a minor style inconsistency with other patterns in the codebase (e.g., CloudEventValueResolutionStrategy.AsEnumerable()).
Inconsistent verb usage in CRUD operations: The API uses 'Create', 'Get', 'List', 'Update', 'Patch', 'Delete'. While common, 'Get' and 'List' are specific HTTP verbs, whereas 'Create', 'Update', 'Patch', 'Delete' are action-oriented. More importantly, 'Get' is used for single item retrieval, but 'List' is used for collections. This is a minor inconsistency in naming convention (Get vs Fetch/Find).

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Duplicate intent finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for enumeration helpers finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent verb usage in CRUD operations finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

D24 · Comment Value / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Critical / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 valuable / 100 redundant across 200 sampled comments; 2 shown with locations.

redundant comment · ×2src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Configuration/CloudShapesApiClientOptions.cs:1

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with CloudShapesApiClientOptions.cs, ProjectionTypesApiClient.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 of 7 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

D27 · Navigability8.7 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps.

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

90 % of calls cross a namespace and 13 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

What to do

  1. Improve Navigability — currently 8.7/10. — 90 % of calls cross a namespace and 13 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md.

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

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

Method: Git-history secret scan via gitleaks detect over full history in an isolated checkout; each match flagged High. Exhaustive; degrades cleanly when tool absent.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep --config auto across the repo; severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a 0-10 wide normalizer. 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

semgrep found no security issues.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs), direct or transitive.

Method: NuGet CVE scan via dotnet list package --vulnerable including transitive; severity tally (Critical/High/Medium/Low) to 0-10 tight normalizer. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades when absent.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 vulnerable package(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 1 medium, 0 low.

High CVE: Snappier 1.0.0detected by dotnet list package --vulnerable
Medium CVE: SharpCompress 0.30.1detected by dotnet list package --vulnerable

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 0 medium, 1 low.

High IaC: DS-0017 · ×2src/CloudShapes.Api/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding
Low IaC: DS-0026src/CloudShapes.Api/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness2.7 / 10Poor✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 2.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

51 of 71 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs.

Dormant codebase

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D35 · Change Coupling8.5 / 10Healthy✓ 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; coupling through a build step, config, or non-source file isn't seen.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs↔ProjectionType.cs 73%; ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs↔ProjectionType.cs 70%; CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs↔ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs 70%

Boundary-crossing change coupling: ProjectionsApiClient.cs ↔ CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs · ×2src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/ProjectionsApiClient.cs
Change coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionType.cs · ×8src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with IProjectionsApiClient.cs, ProjectionsApiClient.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 8 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs (4), CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs (2), ProjectionIndexDefinition.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

Unpinned build actions
No build provenance
No artifact signing
No SBOM

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Unpinned build actions finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 No build provenance finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 No artifact signing 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.

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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · 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.

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, and video has a captions track. 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.

AC2 · Forms & labels4.1 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, fieldsets have a legend, 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.

  • This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label. (×12) — CloudEventFilterEditor.razor:7, CloudEventFilterEditor.razor:11, CloudEventFilterEditor.razor:31, …
  • This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. (×13) — UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor:38, IndexEditorModal.razor:39, IndexEditorModal.razor:44, …

What to do

  • Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
AC3 · Page structure5.5 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language and title, expose a main landmark and a sane heading order, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes 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.

  • Skipping heading levels breaks the document outline assistive tech relies on. Don't jump levels — increase by at most one. — View.razor:23
  • No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — index.html:2
  • user-scalable=no/0 or a maximum-scale below 2 stops low-vision users zooming to 200%. Remove the zoom restriction from the viewport meta. — index.html:73

What to do

  • Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC4 · Keyboard semantics4.7 / 10Fair✓ 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 positive tabindex, no href-less anchor. 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.

  • A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler. (×6) — ProjectionDetails.razor:42, ProjectionDetails.razor:79, ProjectionDetails.razor:93, …
  • An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action. — index.html:114

What to do

  • Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.
AC5 · ARIA correctness6.9 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, and no aria-hidden on 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.

  • The switch role requires aria-checked to convey its state. Add it. — View.razor:118

What to do

  • Use valid, non-abstract roles, supply the ARIA state each role requires, and never put aria-hidden on a focusable element.
AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility) configured, and axe/pa11y/Lighthouse wired into tests or CI — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.

Method: Repo config/CI scan: an a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility) configured, and axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI, graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.

  • No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time.

What to do

  • Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y (or vuejs-accessibility), assert with jest-axe / playwright-axe in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

AX10 · Code composition6.8 / 10Healthy✓ 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.

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 — check that business logic isn't leaking into the application/infrastructure layers (a thin domain is the anemic-domain smell).
AX2 · Stateful singletons4.8 / 10Fair✓ 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.

  • `MonacoEditorHelper` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_preferredTheme, _modelCount; e.g. `_preferredTheme` at line 84). — MonacoEditorHelper.cs:19
  • `BreadcrumbManager` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_items; e.g. `_items` at line 41). — BreadcrumbManager.cs:20

What to do

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

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

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

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

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

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

AX6 · Interface segregation9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface member counts; fat-interface threshold (over 15 members) flagged per type. Deterministic, type-level.

  • `IMonacoEditorMarker` declares 39 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — IMonacoEditorMarker.cs:19

What to do

  • Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
AX9 · CQS / query purity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

C2 · Access Controls0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether access is authorized by default — [Authorize]/policies or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from handlers.

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

  • No [Authorize]/policies and no imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) were found — endpoints may be unprotected.

What to do

  • Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler.
ED1 · Handler temporal coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

ED2 · Event/command shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether commands have a single handler (one owner of the decision) and fan-out is modelled with events.

Method: Roslyn scan (event-driven gated): command-shaped messages identified by convention; handler count per command checked for the exactly-one rule. Deterministic, hard fact.

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

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

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

ED4 · Outbox / dual-write10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

ED5 · Idempotency10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • A placeholder string ("Replacement document must have a valid I…") is still in shipped code — typical of generated boilerplate that was never filled in. — BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:137

What to do

  • Finish or delete NotImplementedException stubs and replace placeholder literals before shipping.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs8.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

  • `OnCloudEventAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — Store.cs:549

What to do

  • Remove the dead code that still moves this score: delete dead if(false) / #if false branches and either do the real async work or drop the async keyword from fake-async methods.
M1 · Documentation (README)7.3 / 10Healthy✓ 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 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
  • Add a README to the 7 of 7 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No Architecture Decision Records found — decisions aren't captured for future maintainers.
  • No C4/PlantUML/Mermaid diagram or architecture.md — the high-level shape isn't documented.

What to do

  • Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
  • Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure8.0 / 10Healthy✓ 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.

  • Test projects aren't grouped under a tests/ folder — the test surface isn't separable from production code at a glance.

What to do

  • Group test projects under tests/ (or test/, spec/) so the test surface is discoverable and CI can scope it.
M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

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

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

P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Fair✓ 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. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • 204/210 types (97%) are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — make internal-by-default and expose only the intended API.

What to do

  • Make types internal by default; expose only the deliberate public API so internals can change without breaking consumers.
P2 · Observability7.0 / 10Healthy✓ 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.

What to do

  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics and a health-check endpoint for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: CodeQL, Dependabot, secret-scanning, and BenchmarkDotNet presence in pipelines and projects. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No static application security testing (CodeQL / security analyzers / codehealth) detected.

What to do

  • Add a SAST step (e.g. CodeQL) or a security analyzer package.
  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Deployment automation exists but no readiness/liveness probes, rolling-update strategy, lifecycle hooks or migration job were evidenced — a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

What to do

  • Add readiness/liveness probes and a rolling-update (or blue/green) strategy so a bad release is caught and rolled back automatically.
  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P5 · DR & Backup0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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.

  • A persistence guard (data volume / purge-protection) was found, but no backup, geo-recovery or RTO/RPO controls were evidenced — a volume that survives a container recreate is not a tested restore from catastrophic loss.

What to do

  • Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.
P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Fair✓ 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.
P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience3.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: Polly resilience markers (Retry, CircuitBreaker, Timeout) on outbound HTTP invocations. Computed per type, deterministic.

  • The app makes outbound HTTP calls but no resilience handler was detected (Polly / AddStandardResilienceHandler / circuit-breaker). A slow or failing dependency will cascade — add timeouts, retries with back-off, and a circuit breaker.

What to do

  • Add `AddStandardResilienceHandler()` (or Polly policies) to your HttpClient registrations so a flaky dependency can't take the app down.
P8 · Schema migrations6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage. Exhaustive per project, deterministic.

  • EF Core is used but neither migrations nor EnsureCreated were detected — confirm how the production schema is created and evolved.

What to do

  • Adopt EF migrations (dotnet ef migrations add + Migrate() on startup) as the explicit, versioned schema strategy — no migration mechanism was detected.
PF1 · Benchmark discipline6.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the library protects its performance with benchmarks — a BenchmarkDotNet suite, an allocation MemoryDiagnoser, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.

Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

  • No BenchmarkDotNet suite was found. For a performance-sensitive library, a benchmark guards against silent regressions — but it's a bonus here, not a deduction.

What to do

  • Add a BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations), and run it in CI to catch regressions.
PF2 · Allocation hygiene7.7 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's GC — Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.

Method: Production-source scan: density (per 1k LoC) of allocation-aware APIs — Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

What to do

  • Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 42 use(s) across 12,083 production line(s) (~3.5/1k). More Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc and ValueTask on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene8.6 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code keeps its host responsive — a library awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) (so it never captures and stalls the host's context) and avoids sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) that wastes threads and risks deadlock.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) counted everywhere, and — for a library with ≥5 awaits — the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

  • Only 152/238 awaits use ConfigureAwait(false). A library that captures the caller's context can stall or deadlock its host — the classic way a dependency drags an app down.

What to do

  • In library code, append .ConfigureAwait(false) to every await (or set <ConfigureAwait>false</ConfigureAwait> / use the analyzer CA2007) so the library never captures the host's context.
S1 · Web-Security Posture4.5 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. Deterministic.

  • No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts and no reverse-proxy signal — transport security is unverified at the app layer. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No CookieSecurePolicy/HttpOnly/SameSite configuration found. (−1.5 on this card; skip if the app sets no cookies.)

What to do

  • Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
  • Enforce HTTPS at the app layer (UseHttpsRedirection / UseHsts) — only skip this if a reverse proxy demonstrably terminates TLS.
  • Set secure cookie flags — CookieSecurePolicy.Always, HttpOnly, and SameSite (Strict/Lax) on auth/session cookies. Skip only if the app sets no cookies.
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.

X2 · Cancellation propagation7.7 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

  • Only 56/92 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so requests can't be cancelled cleanly under load or on client disconnect. In Blazor Server circuits and other short-write hosts, omitting it can be an accepted convention — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter — work can't be cancelled cleanly on disconnect/shutdown. (×25) — Repository.cs:389, Store.cs:206, Store.cs:234, …

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X3 · Exception handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

X4 · Structured logging5.5 / 10Fair✓ 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. Deterministic.

  • Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. (×3) — DatabaseProvisioner.cs:278, Store.cs:139, Store.cs:174

What to do

  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging
X5 · Nullable reference types7.6 / 10Healthy✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • ~3.0 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.

What to do

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

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 13 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria — 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).

DimensionWCAG 2.2 A/AA criteriaCoverage
AC1 · Text alternatives1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC4 · Keyboard semantics2.1.1, 2.4.3Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness4.1.2Partial signal
AC7 · A11y enforcementenforcement — no page criterionEnforcement posture (process)

Reference — by lens

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

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health77%HealthySolid.
Architecture75%HealthySolid.
Maturity50%Fair — gated by D34, M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness21%Poor — gated by D8, D9, P3, P5, P7Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security34%Poor — gated by D36, C2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event-Driven100%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Accessibility50%FairAcceptable, with room to improve.
Performance72%HealthySolid.
Not included — 23 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.

  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No styled element found in the parsed markup — AC6 not applicable here.
  • 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
  • C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
  • D10 Test Quality — No tests in the analyzed solution to assess for quality.
  • D11 Test Reliability — No tests discovered
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — Bounded contexts not declared
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — Not applicable
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not applicable
  • D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not applicable
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — No checkable ADRs to assess
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not run — 0/3 markers found
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not run — 0/3 markers found
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — no data
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — run tests with `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` (or in CI) to enable this cross-layer check
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — no data
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — no data
  • X8 JS interop contract — no data

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.

Issue — 6 finding(s)
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×2
  • High IaC: DS-0017 src/CloudShapes.Api/Dockerfile — 'RUN <package-manager> update' instruction alone
  • High IaC: DS-0029 src/CloudShapes.Api/Dockerfile — 'apt-get' missing '--no-install-recommends'
D35 · Change Coupling · Boundary-crossing change coupling · ×2
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: ProjectionsApiClient.cs ↔ CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/ProjectionsApiClient.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/ProjectionsApiClient.cs` (context CloudShapes.Api.Client) and `src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/Projections/CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs` (context CloudShapes) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 50% of the time (5 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: IProjectionsApiClient.cs ↔ CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/Interfaces/IProjectionsApiClient.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/Interfaces/IProjectionsApiClient.cs` (context CloudShapes.Api.Client) and `src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/Projections/CreateProjectionCommandHandler.cs` (context CloudShapes) live in DIFFERENT modules yet change together 50% of the time (5 shared commits) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×1
  • High CVE: Snappier 1.0.0 — Snappier 1.0.0 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 2 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
D8 · Code Coverage · No automated tests · ×1
  • No automated tests — No automated tests — the solution has no test code. Untested code is the largest single risk to changing it safely.
Warning — 45 finding(s)
D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×8
  • Change coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionType.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionType.cs` change together 73% of the time (8 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs ↔ ProjectionType.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionType.cs` change together 70% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs` change together 70% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs` change together 70% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionType.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionType.cs` change together 64% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionIndexDefinition.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionIndexDefinition.cs` change together 64% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs ↔ CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventFilterDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/CloudEventTriggerDefinition.cs` change together 64% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: ProjectionIndexDefinition.cs ↔ ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionIndexDefinition.cs — `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionIndexDefinition.cs` and `src/CloudShapes.Data/Models/ProjectionTriggerCollection.cs` change together 60% of the time (6 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×5
  • Low cohesion: ProjectionListStore (LCOM4 8) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/Store.cs:23 — ProjectionListStore's methods form 8 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: ProjectionTypeListStore (LCOM4 6) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/List/Store.cs:21 — ProjectionTypeListStore's methods form 6 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: ProjectionTypeEditorStore (LCOM4 4) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Editor/Store.cs:26 — ProjectionTypeEditorStore's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: MonacoEditorHelper (LCOM4 4) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Services/MonacoEditorHelper.cs:19 — MonacoEditorHelper's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: StatefulComponent (LCOM4 4) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/StatefulComponent.cs:22 — StatefulComponent's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×4
  • TodoComment src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:126 — // todo: handle ex — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:150 — //todo: handle ex — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:174 — //todo: handle ex — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/Store.cs:356 — //todo: show error to end user instead — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×2
  • Off the main sequence: CloudShapes.Data — CloudShapes.Data: abstractness 0.02, instability 0.00, distance 0.98 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: CloudShapes.Integration — CloudShapes.Integration: abstractness 0.04, instability 0.20, distance 0.76 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BsonDocumentExtensions.Find (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • BsonDocumentExtensions.Find (cognitive 33) src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:41 — BsonDocumentExtensions.Find has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · IDictionaryExtensions.Find (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • IDictionaryExtensions.Find (cognitive 33) src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/IDictionaryExtensions.cs:30 — IDictionaryExtensions.Find has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 31) · ×1
  • CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 31) src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/ProjectionTypes/CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.cs:63 — CreateProjectionTypeCommandHandler.HandleAsync has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QueryOptionsExtensions.BuildFilter (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • QueryOptionsExtensions.BuildFilter (cognitive 26) src/CloudShapes.Application/Extensions/QueryOptionsExtensions.cs:29 — QueryOptionsExtensions.BuildFilter has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Repository.AddAsync (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • Repository.AddAsync (cognitive 26) src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/Repository.cs:146 — Repository.AddAsync has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Repository.UpdateAsync (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • Repository.UpdateAsync (cognitive 25) src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/Repository.cs:215 — Repository.UpdateAsync has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor › OnEditorInputChangedAsync (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor › OnEditorInputChangedAsync (cognitive 25) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/CreateUpdateEditorModal/UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor:123 — UpdateTriggerEditorModal.razor › OnEditorInputChangedAsync has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Repository.DeleteAsync (cognitive 24) · ×1
  • Repository.DeleteAsync (cognitive 24) src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/Repository.cs:302 — Repository.DeleteAsync has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BsonDocumentExtensions.ReplaceRecursive (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • BsonDocumentExtensions.ReplaceRecursive (cognitive 23) src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:96 — BsonDocumentExtensions.ReplaceRecursive has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BsonDocumentExtensions.AddToRecursive (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • BsonDocumentExtensions.AddToRecursive (cognitive 23) src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:166 — BsonDocumentExtensions.AddToRecursive has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MigrateProjectionTypeSchemaCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • MigrateProjectionTypeSchemaCommandHandler.HandleAsync (cognitive 19) src/CloudShapes.Application/Commands/ProjectionTypes/MigrateProjectionTypeSchemaCommandHandler.cs:44 — MigrateProjectionTypeSchemaCommandHandler.HandleAsync has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DatabaseProvisioner.PrioritizeProjectionTypes (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • DatabaseProvisioner.PrioritizeProjectionTypes (cognitive 19) src/CloudShapes.Application/Services/DatabaseProvisioner.cs:260 — DatabaseProvisioner.PrioritizeProjectionTypes has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StoreFactory.FindAndMapReducersPerState (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • StoreFactory.FindAndMapReducersPerState (cognitive 19) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/StoreFactory.cs:116 — StoreFactory.FindAndMapReducersPerState has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StoreFactory.ConfigureStoreEffects (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • StoreFactory.ConfigureStoreEffects (cognitive 17) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/StoreFactory.cs:72 — StoreFactory.ConfigureStoreEffects has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · View.razor › OnProjectionTypeEditorAsync (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • View.razor › OnProjectionTypeEditorAsync (cognitive 16) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Editor/View.razor:723 — View.razor › OnProjectionTypeEditorAsync has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15).
D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate intent · ×1
  • Duplicate intent: Both types expose a GetTypes() method that appears to return the same kind of data (list of strings), but are split across two different types (ProjectionTypes vs Projections). — Consolidate into a single type or ensure the methods have distinct semantic meanings. If they return the same data, merge the types. (signatures: CloudShapes.Data.ProjectionTypes.GetTypes() | CloudShapes.Data.Projections.GetTypes())
D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming for enumeration helpers · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for enumeration helpers: The Problems namespace uses AsEnumerable() for all three subtypes, which is consistent, but the subtypes themselves (Types, Titles, Statuses) are distinct domains, so this is actually consistent. However, the use of AsEnumerable() for static constants is a minor style inconsistency with other patterns in the codebase (e.g., CloudEventValueResolutionStrategy.AsEnumerable()). — No action needed if the intent is purely enumeration of constants. If these are meant to be used in LINQ, AsEnumerable() is fine. If they are just constants, consider removing the method. (signatures: CloudShapes.Data.Problems.Types.AsEnumerable() | CloudShapes.Data.Problems.Titles.AsEnumerable() | CloudShapes.Data.Problems.Statuses.AsEnumerable())
D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent verb usage in CRUD operations · ×1
  • Inconsistent verb usage in CRUD operations: The API uses 'Create', 'Get', 'List', 'Update', 'Patch', 'Delete'. While common, 'Get' and 'List' are specific HTTP verbs, whereas 'Create', 'Update', 'Patch', 'Delete' are action-oriented. More importantly, 'Get' is used for single item retrieval, but 'List' is used for collections. This is a minor inconsistency in naming convention (Get vs Fetch/Find). — Consider standardizing on 'Fetch' or 'Get' for all single-item retrievals and 'List' or 'Search' for collections. The current mix is acceptable but 'Get' vs 'Find' vs 'Lookup' is a common source of confusion. Here, 'Get' is used, which is fine, but ensure 'List' is not replaced by 'GetAll' or 'Search' elsewhere. (signatures: CloudShapes.Api.Client.Services.IProjectionsApiClient.CreateAsync() | CloudShapes.Api.Client.Services.IProjectionsApiClient.GetAsync() | CloudShapes.Api.Client.Services.IProjectionsApiClient.ListAsync() | CloudShapes.Api.Client.Services.IProjectionsApiClient.UpdateAsync() | CloudShapes.Api.Client.Services.IProjectionsApiClient.PatchAsync() | CloudShapes.Api.Client.Services.IProjectionsApiClient.DeleteAsync())
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×1
  • TooManyMethods: View.razor › __RazorCode_View_1 src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/View.razor:0 — TooManyMethods — 0 lines, 45 methods.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×1
  • Medium CVE: SharpCompress 0.30.1 — SharpCompress 0.30.1 (transitive) has a Medium advisory; affects 2 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · Unpinned build actions · ×1
  • Unpinned build actions — CI references GitHub Actions by a floating ref (@main / @tag) rather than a pinned commit SHA, weakening build integrity.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (65 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (65 lines × 2) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/ProjectionsNav/Store.cs:66 — src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/ProjectionsNav/Store.cs:66-129 | src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/Projections/List/Store.cs:429-493
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Indexes/Store.cs:77 — src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Indexes/Store.cs:77-85 | src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Relationships/Store.cs:77-85 | src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Schema/Store.cs:77-85 | src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Pages/ProjectionTypes/Triggers/Store.cs:77-85
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:99 — src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:99-107 | src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/BsonDocumentExtensions.cs:169-177
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/JsonSchemaExtensions.cs:36 — src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/JsonSchemaExtensions.cs:36-43 | src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/JsonSchemaExtensions.cs:70-77 | src/CloudShapes.Data/Extensions/JsonSchemaExtensions.cs:102-109
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/Feature.cs:61 — src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/Feature.cs:61-65 | src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/State.cs:53-57
Recommendation — 19 finding(s)
D24 · Comment Value · redundant comment · ×2
  • redundant comment src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Configuration/CloudShapesApiClientOptions.cs:1 — "// Copyright © 2025-Present The Cloud Shapes Authors" — Use a standard license header tool (e.g., HeaderCheck, Apache Header) to manage these automatically. Manual comments here add no value and cause merge conflicts.
  • redundant comment src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/Services/ProjectionTypesApiClient.cs:3 — "// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License")," — Remove all manual license header comments. Rely on the repository's root LICENSE file and build tooling to enforce compliance.
D11 · Test Reliability · No tests discovered · ×1
  • No tests discovered — Test reliability not scored — the test tier(s) built and ran but no tests were discovered, so reliability couldn't be exercised.
D16 · Bus Factor · Small-team knowledge concentration · ×1
  • Small-team knowledge concentration — 43 file(s) are concentrated to one author — the ambient state with 4 active author(s), not 43 separate risks. The signal becomes meaningful as ownership spreads; no per-file action implied now.
D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1
  • Off-boarding risk: charles.davernas@neuroglia.io — If charles.davernas@neuroglia.io becomes unavailable, 43 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner — the largest single-person knowledge concentration (weighted toward the domain core). Pair, review, or document these before any departure.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found at common paths; consider documenting architectural decisions in Docs/ADL/ or similar.
D21 · Naming Consistency · The state and store for the ProjectionType editor are named inconsistently. One uses 'State' and the other uses 'Store', suggesting they serve related but distinct roles in the state management pattern. · ×1
  • The state and store for the ProjectionType editor are named inconsistently. One uses 'State' and the other uses 'Store', suggesting they serve related but distinct roles in the state management pattern. — Standardize the suffix to either 'State' or 'Store' across all editor-related components to reflect their specific role (e.g., 'State' for data containers, 'Store' for state management logic). (symbols: CloudShapes.Dashboard.Pages.ProjectionTypes.Editor.ProjectionTypeEditorState, CloudShapes.Dashboard.Pages.ProjectionTypes.Editor.ProjectionTypeEditorStore)
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Bounded contexts not declared · ×1
  • Bounded contexts not declared — A codebase of this size and project count likely contains multiple distinct domains, making the absence of declared bounded contexts a risk for unassessed type coupling. Declare architecture.contexts (≥2) in config to assess cross-boundary type coupling.
D25 · ADR Conformance · no ADRs to check · ×1
  • no ADRs to check — No ADRs found, so conformance can't be assessed.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×1
  • Low IaC: DS-0026 src/CloudShapes.Api/Dockerfile — No HEALTHCHECK defined
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside bin/obj (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Dormant codebase · ×1
  • Dormant codebase — 51 of 71 significant files have no living knowledge — the codebase as a whole is dormant, not 51 separate risks. Re-engage owners or document before change.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · No build provenance · ×1
  • No build provenance — No SLSA provenance generation or build attestation found in CI (e.g. slsa-github-generator, actions/attest-build-provenance).
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · No artifact signing · ×1
  • No artifact signing — No artifact signing found in CI (e.g. cosign / sigstore / gitsign).
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · No SBOM · ×1
  • No SBOM — No SBOM generation or committed SBOM found (e.g. syft / anchore/sbom-action / *.spdx.json / *.cdx.json).
D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No JS/npm lockfile found outside bin/obj (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); nothing for OSV to scan.
D7 · Architectural Integrity · No checkable ADRs to assess · ×1
  • No checkable ADRs to assess — No architecture decision records were found and the project graph is acyclic, so architectural integrity could not be assessed. Add ADRs (with `enforcement: analyzer|test`) to make the architecture's rules checkable.
D9 · Test Distribution · No tests found · ×1
  • No tests found — No test projects found in the repository.
Info — 29 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×11
  • Outdated: MongoDB.Driver — MongoDB.Driver 3.3.0 → 3.9.0 available.
  • Outdated: Neuroglia.Data.Expressions.Abstractions — Neuroglia.Data.Expressions.Abstractions 4.21.0 → 4.24.0 available.
  • Outdated: Neuroglia.Eventing.CloudEvents.Infrastructure — Neuroglia.Eventing.CloudEvents.Infrastructure 4.21.0 → 4.24.0 available.
  • Outdated: Neuroglia.Mediation — Neuroglia.Mediation 4.21.0 → 4.24.0 available.
  • Outdated: System.Linq.Async — System.Linq.Async 6.0.1 → 7.0.1 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebAssembly.Server — Microsoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebAssembly.Server 9.0.4 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.OpenApi — Microsoft.AspNetCore.OpenApi 9.0.4 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets — Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets 1.21.2 → 1.23.0 available.
  • Outdated: Neuroglia.Data.Expressions.JQ — Neuroglia.Data.Expressions.JQ 4.21.0 → 4.24.0 available.
  • Outdated: Neuroglia.Mediation.AspNetCore — Neuroglia.Mediation.AspNetCore 4.21.0 → 4.24.0 available.
  • Outdated: Scalar.AspNetCore — Scalar.AspNetCore 2.1.16 → 2.16.4 available.
D19 · Documentation Quality · XML-doc coverage · ×7
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Application src/CloudShapes.Application/CloudShapes.Application.csproj — CloudShapes.Application: 100 % XML-doc coverage (79/79).
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Api src/CloudShapes.Api/CloudShapes.Api.csproj — CloudShapes.Api: 100 % XML-doc coverage (24/24).
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Data src/CloudShapes.Data/CloudShapes.Data.csproj — CloudShapes.Data: 100 % XML-doc coverage (183/183).
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Dashboard src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/CloudShapes.Dashboard.csproj — CloudShapes.Dashboard: 100 % XML-doc coverage (382/382).
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement.csproj — CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement: 100 % XML-doc coverage (105/105).
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Api.Client src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/CloudShapes.Api.Client.csproj — CloudShapes.Api.Client: 100 % XML-doc coverage (35/35).
  • XML-doc coverage: CloudShapes.Integration src/CloudShapes.Integration/CloudShapes.Integration.csproj — CloudShapes.Integration: 100 % XML-doc coverage (70/70).
D17 · Explicit Debt · Justified suppression · ×3
  • Justified suppression src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:124 — empty catch — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
  • Justified suppression src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:148 — empty catch — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
  • Justified suppression src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/Components/MonacoEditor/Store.cs:172 — empty catch — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
D14 · License Compliance · Licenses scanned · ×1
  • Licenses scanned — 31 packages scanned; 2 distinct SPDX licenses.
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Application (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Application (Production) src/CloudShapes.Application/CloudShapes.Application.csproj — 30 .cs files, 2364 LoC (1149 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Api (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Api (Production) src/CloudShapes.Api/CloudShapes.Api.csproj — 10 .cs files, 595 LoC (283 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Data (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Data (Production) src/CloudShapes.Data/CloudShapes.Data.csproj — 28 .cs files, 2132 LoC (904 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Dashboard (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Dashboard (Production) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard/CloudShapes.Dashboard.csproj — 47 .cs files, 4857 LoC (2238 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement (Production) src/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement/CloudShapes.Dashboard.StateManagement.csproj — 32 .cs files, 2054 LoC (740 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Api.Client (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Api.Client (Production) src/CloudShapes.Api.Client/CloudShapes.Api.Client.csproj — 13 .cs files, 774 LoC (307 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · CloudShapes.Integration (Production) · ×1
  • CloudShapes.Integration (Production) src/CloudShapes.Integration/CloudShapes.Integration.csproj — 24 .cs files, 832 LoC (157 significant)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaksgitleaks detect --no-banner --report-format json --report-path /dev/stdout --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrepsemgrep --config auto --json --quiet --timeout 0 --metrics off .0
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnetdotnet list CloudShapes.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json2artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivytrivy config --format json --quiet .3artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrepsemgrep: not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.0
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivytrivy: not applicable — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside bin/obj (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.0
D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilitiesosv-scannerosv-scanner: not applicable — No JS/npm lockfile found outside bin/obj (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); nothing for OSV to scan.0

Run 019ee1ec-1b76-7e2e-a7a3-2773f7db5dd6 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Downloadable artifacts

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

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif