Public report — quotio, published 30 Sep 2026. Concrete security findings (which rule fired, in which file, on which line; CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are REDACTED in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Public
Codebase survey Measured under the Code Assurance Index · rubric rubric-2026.09.18 (frozen) · verify this survey Filed cd_55a12377dce543a9b9803fa2a3a8bbde Filed 30 September 2026, 20:12 UTC Public

Nguyenphutrong/quotio

Measured 30 September 2026, 20:05 UTC

coverage not measured
74% Strong
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Domain Modelling 100% Exemplary Performance 100% Exemplary Architecture 92% Adequate Code Health 89% Strong Security 89% Strong Readiness 70% Adequate Maturity 66% Adequate

Medium · 91,158 LoC · 8 projects · rebuild ~1.5 person-years · weakest lens: Maturity (66%)

Findings by grade

5 critical 204 serious 13 minor 40 could not be resolved — could be critical — see Limitations

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
30 September 2026, 20:05 UTC

A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index does not certify, approve or guarantee this codebase; it records a reproducible number and the evidence it was computed from. The standard is authored by Canine Development, who also build Watchdog — its only implementation today. That is said here so the number is checked rather than believed.

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

45/50dimensions tool-verifieddeterministic · confidence 1.0 · 5 LLM-assisted, advisory
207findings with an exact file:lineof 222 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
50/131dimensions across the health lenses91158 LoC · 8 projects — wide & deep
Chapters

Executive summary

The system holds a strong overall standing of 74%, indicating a healthy asset that is well-engineered but carries specific operational risks. With nearly 100,000 lines of production code and a rebuild cost of approximately €220,000, significant value is tied up in this codebase. The architecture and code health are excellent, suggesting that changes can be made with minimal ripple effects and high maintainability. However, gaps in maturity and production readiness create friction that could slow delivery and increase the likelihood of defects in the short term.

The primary risk lies in organizational memory and operational trust. While the code itself is robust, the lack of documented decision records means new teams may struggle to understand the context behind key design choices. This ambiguity can lead to repeated mistakes, longer onboarding times, and slower feature development. Additionally, the absence of measured test coverage and clear production readiness signals introduces uncertainty about system reliability. Without verified safety nets, the cost of outages or security incidents could be substantial, as the team cannot confidently predict how changes will behave in live environments.

Conversely, the system’s architectural integrity and domain clarity are genuine strengths. The perfect scores in domain modeling and performance indicate that the core logic is sound, efficient, and well-aligned with business needs. The code is clean, with no boilerplate or messy logic, which reduces technical debt and keeps long-term maintenance costs low. This solid foundation means that once the immediate maturity gaps are addressed, the system will be highly responsive to future business requirements.

To maximize leverage, the team should prioritize documenting significant decisions immediately. Creating a structured record of key choices will quickly improve team alignment and reduce future confusion, offering the highest return on effort. This step is low-cost but high-impact, enabling faster decision-making and smoother onboarding. Other improvements, such as organizing code structure, can follow once the decision-making framework is in place. Note that some areas, like event-driven patterns and accessibility, were not measured, so the picture remains partial in those dimensions.

Code Health 89% Strong Architecture 92% Adequate · gated by D26 Maturity 66% Adequate · gated by M2 Readiness 70% Adequate Security 89% Strong Domain Modelling 100% ★ Exemplary Performance 100% ★ Exemplary
How the score is built — each lens's share of the headline Width is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.
Maturity 66% · 46% weightReadiness 70% · 25% weightSecurity 89% · 14% weightCode Health 89% · 8% weightArchitecture 92% · 4% weightDomain Modelling 100% · 2% weightPerformance 100% · 1% weight

Raise Maturity 66 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 74 → ~76.

Code composition — where the lines go
Tests 100%
New since the last scan (100+)

145 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-14) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required. Showing the first 100; the full set is in the report.

  • D1 · QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cyclomatic 49) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift
  • D1 · AccountRow.body (cyclomatic 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift
  • D1 · AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cyclomatic 27) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift
  • D1 · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cyclomatic 26) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift
  • D1 · ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cyclomatic 26) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift
  • D1 · QuotaProvider.entry (cyclomatic 25) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift
  • D1 · AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cyclomatic 23) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift
  • D1 · QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData (cyclomatic 21) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostHTTPClient.swift
  • D1 · QuotaWidgetView.body (cyclomatic 21) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift
  • D1 · QuotioCLIServerProcess.start (cyclomatic 20) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift
  • D1 · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric (cyclomatic 20) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift
  • D1 · ProviderSettingsState.init (cyclomatic 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Accounts/ProviderSettingsState.swift
  • D1 · QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate (cyclomatic 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.swift
  • D1 · ProvidersScreen.body (cyclomatic 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift
  • D1 · HostStore.refresh (cyclomatic 17) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/HostStore.swift
  • D1 · QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D1 · QuotioCLIBackend.resolvedAccount (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D1 · AppSettingsPage.body (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AppSettingsPage.swift
  • D2 · QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cognitive 59) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift
  • D2 · QuotaWidgetView.body (cognitive 57) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift
  • D2 · QuotaProvider.entry (cognitive 47) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift
  • D2 · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cognitive 41) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift
  • D2 · ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cognitive 40) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift
  • D2 · AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cognitive 35) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift
  • D2 · AccountRow.body (cognitive 33) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift
  • D2 · QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate (cognitive 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.swift
  • D2 · ProvidersScreen.body (cognitive 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift
  • D2 · ProviderSettingsState.init (cognitive 27) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Accounts/ProviderSettingsState.swift
  • D2 · AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cognitive 26) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift
  • D2 · QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cognitive 24) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D2 · QuotioCLIServerProcess.start (cognitive 22) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift
  • D2 · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric (cognitive 22) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift
  • D2 · OAuthStatusView.body (cognitive 21) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/OAuthSheet.swift
  • D2 · AppSettingsPage.body (cognitive 21) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AppSettingsPage.swift
  • D2 · QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData (cognitive 20) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostHTTPClient.swift
  • D2 · HostStore.refresh (cognitive 20) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/HostStore.swift
  • D2 · CompanionConnectionSetupView.body (cognitive 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/CompanionConnectionSetupView.swift
  • D2 · PairHostView.body (cognitive 17) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/PairHostView.swift
  • D2 · QuotioCLIOAuthAuthorizer.begin (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIOAuthAuthorizer.swift
  • D2 · QuotioCompanionService.configure (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCompanionService.swift
  • D2 · DisplayNames.metricLabel (cognitive 16) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift
  • D2 · DisplayNames.resetHint (cognitive 16) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift
  • D2 · RootView.body (cognitive 16) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/RootView.swift
  • D3 · MethodTooLong: CompositionRoot.makeProduction apps/macos/Quotio/App/CompositionRoot.swift
  • D3 · TooManyMethods: QuotioCLIBackend Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D3 · FileTooLong: Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift
  • D3 · MethodTooLong: AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift
  • D3 · MethodTooLong: ProvidersScreen.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift
  • D3 · MethodTooLong: AccountRow.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift
  • D3 · MethodTooLong: OAuthStatusView.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/OAuthSheet.swift
  • D3 · FileTooLong: QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D3 · MethodTooLong: AccountsSettingsScreen.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift
  • D4 · Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift
  • D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (7 members, 50+ identical tokens) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift
  • D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (18 lines × 4) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/MenuBarBadge.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/SwitchAccountSheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/UsageDisplaySettingsSection.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Providers/CustomProviderPresentation.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/DesignSystem/AccountCard.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Quota/QuotaModels.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/ConnectionIssue.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift
  • D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Agents/AgentModels.swift
  • D5 · Off the main sequence: QuotioDomain
  • D5 · Off the main sequence: QuotioHostClient
  • D6 · Low cohesion: QuotioCLIBackend (LCOM4 7) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift
  • D6 · Low cohesion: String (LCOM4 5) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Accounts/AuthFileRepository.swift
  • D8 · Coverage not measured — Swift suite
  • D10 · Skipped test: testLegacyProtectedCredentialIsReadOnlyAndDoesNotResurrectAfterDeletion Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/AccountPersistenceTests.swift
  • D10 · Skipped test: testRenderAccountsScreenScenarios Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioPresentationTests/AccountsScreenSnapshotTests.swift
  • D10 · Skipped test: testRenderPairingLayouts Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioPresentationTests/CompanionScreenModelTests.swift
  • D10 · Skipped test: testLiveRustTLS Packages/QuotioHostClient/Tests/QuotioHostClientTests/QuotioHostClientTests.swift
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/server.rs apps/cli/src/server.rs
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/vault.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/vault.rs
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/server/management.rs apps/cli/src/server/management.rs
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/main.rs apps/cli/src/main.rs
  • D15 · Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/mod.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/mod.rs

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 — €72,000–€360,000
Cost to rebuild€72,000–€360,000 (0.7–2.3 person-years (1,192–3,782 h), ~1–3 engineers)
Domain complexityHigh — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor1.1× (at 74% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shapeMedium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~1.5 person-years of build effort (about ~€220,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Maturity at 66% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain High (×1.4) — DDD/clean architecture, domain model × a 1.1× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. 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
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
+7.0 pts · Low effort · ADR Quality
2
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
+7.0 pts · Medium effort · Architecture documentation
3
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
+5.7 pts · Medium effort · Folder & project structure

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form). The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).

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 QuotioApplication QuotioApplication QuotioDomain QuotioDomain QuotioApplication->QuotioDomain QuotioHostClient QuotioHostClient QuotioInfrastructure QuotioInfrastructure QuotioInfrastructure->QuotioApplication QuotioInfrastructure->QuotioDomain QuotioInfrastructure->QuotioHostClient QuotioMobile QuotioMobile QuotioMobile->QuotioHostClient QuotioPresentation QuotioPresentation QuotioPresentation->QuotioApplication QuotioPresentation->QuotioDomain quotio (Cargo) quotio (Cargo) quotio (npm) quotio (npm)

Architecture — module dependency matrix

Rows and columns are the same modules, ordered so that a module only depends on ones above it. A cell means the row depends on the column, and its number is how many type pairs create that dependency. Read one thing: is anything above the diagonal? A mark there is a dependency cycle. (A cycle is all this shows — an unusual but cycle-free dependency sits below the diagonal like any other.)

89 modules, 218 dependencies. 4 dependency cycles across 19 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 49 more are not drawn.

Module dependency matrix. The row depends on the column; the number is how many type pairs create the dependency. A cell above the diagonal is part of a dependency cycle.
depends on →1 quotio.error2 apps~ios~QuotioMobile3 quotio.accounts.fixtures.pre_antigravity_reservations4 quotio.domain5 quotio.accounts.vault6 quotio.providers7 repository8 Packages~QuotioHostClient~QuotioHostClient9 quotio.accounts.companion10 quotio.accounts.oauth.copilot11 quotio.cli12 quotio.fetch13 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioPresentation14 quotio.accounts.command15 quotio.accounts.proxy16 quotio.accounts.sources17 quotio.cache18 quotio.settings19 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioInfrastructure20 quotio.accounts.discovery21 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioDomain22 quotio.accounts.discovery.host23 quotio.server.security24 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioApplication25 quotio.accounts26 quotio.accounts.oauth.claude27 quotio.accounts.resolved28 quotio.accounts.service29 quotio.contract30 quotio.providers.codex31 quotio.accounts.api32 quotio.accounts.oauth33 quotio.contract.snapshot34 quotio.providers.factory35 quotio.accounts.api.migration36 quotio.providers.antigravity_auth37 quotio.providers.capabilities38 quotio.server39 quotio.server.management40 quotio.server.native
1 quotio.error
2 apps~ios~QuotioMobile611316
3 quotio.accounts.fixtures.pre_antigravity_reservations1
4 quotio.domain2
5 quotio.accounts.vault2
6 quotio.providers3
7 repository1710814133
8 Packages~QuotioHostClient~QuotioHostClient2116327
9 quotio.accounts.companion1
10 quotio.accounts.oauth.copilot1
11 quotio.cli1
12 quotio.fetch21
13 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioPresentation211174208230
14 quotio.accounts.command112
15 quotio.accounts.proxy242
16 quotio.accounts.sources11
17 quotio.cache14124
18 quotio.settings3
19 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioInfrastructure32238115212
20 quotio.accounts.discovery33
21 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioDomain74368110
22 quotio.accounts.discovery.host1131
23 quotio.server.security121
24 Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioApplication583012124
25 quotio.accounts21411
26 quotio.accounts.oauth.claude1111
27 quotio.accounts.resolved221
28 quotio.accounts.service163946
29 quotio.contract912
30 quotio.providers.codex323
31 quotio.accounts.api2211361
32 quotio.accounts.oauth121421
33 quotio.contract.snapshot14115
34 quotio.providers.factory2311111
35 quotio.accounts.api.migration11111
36 quotio.providers.antigravity_auth4121
37 quotio.providers.capabilities311
38 quotio.server11123132211212
39 quotio.server.management21113
40 quotio.server.native1112
Dependency, pointing down the layeringAbove the diagonal — part of a cycleThe module itself
quotio.errorapps~ios~QuotioMobile…igravity_reservationsquotio.domainquotio.accounts.vaultquotio.providersrepository…ient~QuotioHostClient…io.accounts.companion…ccounts.oauth.copilotquotio.cliquotio.fetch…re~QuotioPresentation…otio.accounts.commandquotio.accounts.proxy…otio.accounts.sourcesquotio.cachequotio.settings…~QuotioInfrastructure…io.accounts.discovery…otioCore~QuotioDomain…counts.discovery.hostquotio.server.security…ore~QuotioApplicationquotio.accounts…accounts.oauth.claude…tio.accounts.resolved…otio.accounts.servicequotio.contractquotio.providers.codexquotio.accounts.apiquotio.accounts.oauth…tio.contract.snapshot…tio.providers.factory…ccounts.api.migration…ders.antigravity_auth…roviders.capabilitiesquotio.server…tio.server.managementquotio.server.nativequotio.error1apps~ios~QuotioMobile2…igravity_reservations3quotio.domain4quotio.accounts.vault5quotio.providers6repository7…ient~QuotioHostClient8…io.accounts.companion9…ccounts.oauth.copilot10quotio.cli11quotio.fetch12…re~QuotioPresentation13…otio.accounts.command14quotio.accounts.proxy15…otio.accounts.sources16quotio.cache17quotio.settings18…~QuotioInfrastructure19…io.accounts.discovery20…otioCore~QuotioDomain21…counts.discovery.host22quotio.server.security23…ore~QuotioApplication24quotio.accounts25…accounts.oauth.claude26…tio.accounts.resolved27…otio.accounts.service28quotio.contract29quotio.providers.codex30quotio.accounts.api31quotio.accounts.oauth32…tio.contract.snapshot33…tio.providers.factory34…ccounts.api.migration35…ders.antigravity_auth36…roviders.capabilities37quotio.server38…tio.server.management39quotio.server.native4061131612231710814133211632711121211174208230112242111412433223811521233743681101131121583012124214111111221163946912323221136112142114115231111111111412131111123132211212211131112+49 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 89% · Strong ·

The Good
D3 · Swift God Classes 9.3 D4 · Swift Code Duplication 9.8 D17 · Swift Explicit Debt 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0
The Bad
D1 · Swift Cyclomatic Complexity 6.8 D2 · Swift Cognitive Complexity 6.6

At a glance — Architecture · 92% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

The Good
D5 · Swift Coupling 8.0 D6 · Swift Cohesion (LCOM4) 9.6 D22 · Swift Internal API Consistency 9.0 D27 · Swift Navigability 7.9 D35 · Swift Change Coupling 9.7 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.4 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0
The Ugly
D26 · Swift Project Cohesion 3.3

At a glance — Maturity · 66% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good
D15 · Swift Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.4 D19 · Swift Documentation Quality 9.0 D21 · Swift Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Swift Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 8.8 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 8.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0
The Ugly
D20 · Swift ADR Quality 0.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 70% · Adequate ·

The Good
D9 · Swift Test Distribution 9.9 D10 · Swift Test Quality 9.6 D12 · Swift Dependency Hygiene 9.9 D13 · Swift Secret Scanning 10.0 D14 · Swift License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 10.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 7.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 7.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0 P7 · Repo Outbound HTTP resilience 10.0
The Bad
P2 · Repo Observability 6.5
The Ugly
P5 · Repo DR & Backup 4.0

At a glance — Security · 89% · Strong ·

The Good
D28 · Swift Secrets (history) 10.0 D29 · Swift Static Analysis (SAST) 7.1 D30 · Swift Dependency Vulnerabilities 9.8 D32 · Swift Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) 9.0 D36 · Swift Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 7.5 D43 · Swift Malicious Dependencies 10.0

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good
DM12 · Repo Ambient inputs in the domain 10.0 DM6 · Repo Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary 10.0 DM8 · Repo Value-object opportunities 10.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good
PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A03:2021 — Injection2High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components1Medium
A04:2021 — Insecure Design1Medium

Roadmap

Begin by establishing a centralized repository for architecture decisions, ensuring each is documented with context and consequences, while simultaneously resolving any gaps in existing ADR quality. Next, reorganize the project structure to isolate production code from tooling, placing source files in a dedicated directory to improve clarity and maintainability. Finally, enhance operational resilience by extending structured logging across all runnable modules and documenting a tested disaster recovery procedure with clear recovery time and point objectives.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.+7.0 ptsLowADR Quality
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).+7.0 ptsMediumArchitecture documentation
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.+5.7 ptsMediumFolder & project structure
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.+5.5 ptsMediumObservability
Document RTO/RPO and a tested restore procedure (a backup config alone isn't disaster recovery).+5.5 ptsMediumDR & Backup
Add a README to the 3 of 5 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.2 pts.+3.7 ptsMediumDocumentation (README)
Resolve the 42 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with server.rs, service.rs, capabilities.rs.+1.2 ptsHighChurn × Complexity Hotspots
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED.+0.3 ptsLowStatic Analysis (SAST)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 73 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 51% mixed · 49% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift4.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cyclomatic 16)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift6.5MixedChange Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: StatusBarManager.swift ↔ QuotioApp.swift
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Proxy/ProxyManagementScreenModel.swift7.0MixedGod Classes: TooManyMethods: ProxyManagementScreenModel
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift7.0MixedCyclomatic Complexity: ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cyclomatic 26)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift7.0MixedCognitive Complexity: StatusBarMenuRenderer.buildMenu (cognitive 16)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift7.0MixedCyclomatic Complexity: OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cyclomatic 33)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift7.0MixedCyclomatic Complexity: ProxyLifecycleController.install (cyclomatic 16)
Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift7.0MixedTest Quality: No assertions: testUnterminatedStringIsRejected
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift7.1MixedCyclomatic Complexity: AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cyclomatic 23)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift7.2MixedCyclomatic Complexity: QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cyclomatic 26)
apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift7.2MixedCyclomatic Complexity: QuotaProvider.entry (cyclomatic 25)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift7.2MixedCyclomatic Complexity: CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString (cyclomatic 24)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift7.2MixedGod Classes: FileTooLong: Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift
REDACTED7.2MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED7.2MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: AccountRow.body (cyclomatic 29)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cyclomatic 27)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult (cyclomatic 16)
Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift7.4MixedCognitive Complexity: LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.runManagementFlow (cognitive 27)
apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift7.4MixedCognitive Complexity: DisplayNames.metricLabel (cognitive 16)

How the grades work

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

Critical — 5

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

Serious — 204

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

Minor — 13

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

Could not be resolved — 40

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

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 45 of 50 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 50 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D10D12D13D14D15D17D19D20D21D22D26D27D28D29D30D32D34D35D36D43AX10AX3AX4AX5AX8AX9DM12DM6DM8M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P5P6P7PF3X29

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, 207 of 222 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivySecrets 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 measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0f3ec-2eab-7f2a-82c8-e9b65889eff1.

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.

  • D10 Test Quality — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The 555 test(s) behind this row are the ones the code-model census could read, and this repository also carries at least 13 test source file(s) (.rs, .cjs) that it cannot: it reads the test types the .swift frontend declared, so a suite in any other language is invisible to it. Skipped tests, zero-assertion tests and the other quality signals on this row are UNMEASURED in that suite — their absence from the counts above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that those tests are sound.
  • D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.swift, .rs, .cjs) and this repository declares a SwiftPM test suite (3 packages), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (47 contributor(s) across 975 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 87% of the history; the other 46 hold 0.3% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/HTTP/ProxyNetworkAdapters.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Platform/ProviderImageCacheAdapter.swift`, … (+46 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a Dockerfile) is simply not read here yet.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection registrations in C# and Spring beans in Java/Kotlin only, and no container it models, or knows cannot hold a captive, was found in this repository's source, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection singletons in C#, Spring/JSR-330/CDI singletons in Java and Kotlin, and module state in Python request handlers only, and this repository's product is written in Swift, which was left unread, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Subject: a native UI project (apps/ios/Quotio.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj). The Runtime Evidence tier boots an app only via docker-compose, an Aspire AppHost, a Dockerfile, or an npm dev script. None was found, so no live runtime a11y/egress/header evidence was collected. You can widen what we reach: add a docker-compose.yml (or an Aspire AppHost) that brings the app up with its dependencies. Watchdog then boots it in an isolated sandbox and gathers real runtime evidence — you change nothing in your pipeline (no CI step, no SDK).
  • C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
  • C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
  • C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
  • C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
  • DM9 Scattered domain decisions — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not measured — scattered-decision detection needs expression-level symbol resolution: a comparison operand bound to the member it judges (arm one) and a construction bound to the type it produces (arm two). A Roslyn compilation carries both; arm two alone also runs on any frontend that declares whether a construction is produced or passed, and this target loaded neither.
  • ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • PF3 Async & latency hygiene — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Those languages colour their functions async, so blocking inside them is the same defect this card counts elsewhere, but their blocking vocabulary is not modelled yet. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the code is free of it.
  • S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
  • X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. X7 measured the part of this repository it reads (C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust and Go), and its Swift source is outside the check's reach, so the card covers only part of the product. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the unread source is free of silent defaults.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
  • D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR): PII/GDPR signals are heuristic pattern matches in code — they flag likely handling concerns, not legal compliance, and cannot trace where data actually flows at runtime.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • 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.
  • DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (5): D19, D21, D22, D26, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity6.8 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

25 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was QuotioHostSnapshot.validate at 49. A further 10 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being AgentConfigurationInstruction.localizedText at 34 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 5 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Agents/AgentModels.swift (AgentConfigurationInstruction.localizedText at 34), Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift (LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.accountName at 19), Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Proxy/ProxyScreenModel.swift (ProxyScreenModel.message at 18), Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/App/PresentationValues.swift (NavigationPage.icon at 16), apps/ios/QuotioIOS/DesignSystem/ProviderIcon.swift (ProviderIcon.asset at 16). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cyclomatic 49)Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift:126
OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cyclomatic 33)Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:220
AccountRow.body (cyclomatic 29)Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift:214
AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cyclomatic 27)Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift:21
QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cyclomatic 26)Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift:14

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cyclomatic 49) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with QuotioHostSnapshot.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cyclomatic 33) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 AccountRow.body (cyclomatic 29) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with AccountRow.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D2 · Cognitive Complexity6.6 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

46 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was QuotioHostSnapshot.validate at 59.

QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cognitive 59)Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift:126
OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cognitive 58)Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:220
QuotaWidgetView.body (cognitive 57)apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift:119
QuotaProvider.entry (cognitive 47)apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift:61
QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cognitive 41)Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift:14

+ 41 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cognitive 59) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with QuotioHostSnapshot.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cognitive 58) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 QuotaWidgetView.body (cognitive 57) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with QuotioWidgets.swift. — 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 Classes9.3 / 10Stronggated by 20 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

20 god class(es) detected.

FileTooLong: MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift · ×7Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift
MethodTooLong: CompositionRoot.makeProduction · ×6apps/macos/Quotio/App/CompositionRoot.swift:16
TooManyMethods: QuotioCLIBackend · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:7
ClassTooLong: CustomProviderSheet · ×3Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift:10

What to do

  1. Resolve the 7 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift, ProviderQuotaView.swift, ProxyLifecycleController.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 6 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with CompositionRoot.swift, ProviderQuotaView.swift, ProvidersScreen.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 4 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with QuotioCLIBackend.swift, ProxyLifecycleController.swift, URLSessionProxyManagementAPI.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  4. Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D4 · Code Duplication9.8 / 10Stronggated by 41 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×6Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Providers/CustomProviderPresentation.swift:39
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:210
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:511
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:68
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×3Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Process/ProxyProcessController.swift:155

+ 17 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift (2), ProviderQuotaView.swift (2), CustomProviderPresentation.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with ProvidersScreen.swift, QuotioButtonStyles.swift, StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with QuotioCLIBackend.swift, AntigravitySwitchModels.swift, FileAccountMetadataRepository.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

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

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

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

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

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

8 production modules (Cargo+npm+SwiftPM), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 2 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 6 of the 8 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: QuotioDomain · ×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)9.6 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

4 of 116 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: QuotioCLIBackend (LCOM4 7) · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:7

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with QuotioCLIBackend.swift, AuthFileRepository.swift, ProxyManagementScreenModel.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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.

D9 · Test Distribution9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1135 test methods: 1038 unit, 92 integration, 0 BDD, 5 e2e. The JavaScript/TypeScript suite contributes 2 `it`/`test` case(s) across 1 test file(s) declaring at least one beside 555 .NET test method(s); its tier split is read from package names and paths only. The Rust suite contributes 572 `#[test]` function(s) across 72 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 10 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test. The Python suite contributes 6 test function(s) across 3 file(s) declaring at least one — every `def test…` in a file pytest or unittest would collect, which is those frameworks' own definition of a case; a parametrize table counts once, so this is a floor. Its tier split is read from file names and paths only.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality9.6 / 10Stronggated by 12 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

5 skipped (1 with a documented reason), 8 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 555 tests. Measured on the .swift suite only — at least 13 test source file(s) (.rs, .cjs) went unread, so its test quality is unmeasured and is not in these counts.

No assertions: testManualCompletionBelongsToCurrentAttempt · ×8Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioApplicationTests/OAuthFlowControllerTests.swift:70
Skipped test: testLegacyProtectedCredentialIsReadOnlyAndDoesNotResurrectAfterDeletion · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/AccountPersistenceTests.swift:254
Skipped (documented): liveRustTLSUsesPairedTrustWithAppTransportSecurityapps/ios/QuotioIOSUnitTests/HostStoreTests.swift:62

What to do

  1. Resolve the 8 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift (7), OAuthFlowControllerTests.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 Skipped test finding(s) in Test Quality — start with AccountPersistenceTests.swift, AccountsScreenSnapshotTests.swift, CompanionScreenModelTests.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  3. Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D12 · Dependency Hygiene9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 outdated direct SwiftPM dependencies, 0 pinning defect(s). SwiftPM has no package registry: a dependency is a repository URL and its releases are that repository's semver tags, so currency is answered by listing tags rather than by querying an index. Only a newer tag on the SAME MAJOR is reported — a `from:` requirement admits everything below the next major and nothing above it, so a major crossing needs a Package.swift edit rather than an update, and naming the update as its remedy would be wrong. Whether any dependency is DEPRECATED or ABANDONED is not graded and cannot be: a repository publishes no such marker, and there is no registry that could carry one. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question.

Outdated: sparkle

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

0 of 258 shipped crate(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from crates.io over the crates a consumer compiles — this repository's REDACTED closed over its manifests' `[dependencies]` and `[build-dependencies]`. Crates it asks for ONLY under `[dev-dependencies]` are excluded: they are not compiled by anything that depends on this repository. This repository publishes itself under MIT, which is its own choice and is not judged here.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.4 / 10Stronggated by 45 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Top hotspots: apps/cli/src/server.rs (57×28=1596); apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs (63×25=1575); apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs (30×40=1200) Repeated repair below the complexity floor: apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs (6 of 6 changes were fixes); REDACTED (3 of 5 changes were fixes); apps/cli/src/providers/catalog/devin_desktop.rs (3 of 5 changes were fixes)

Hotspot: apps/cli/src/server.rs · ×42apps/cli/src/server.rs:738
Repeated repair: apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs · ×3apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs:7

What to do

  1. Resolve the 42 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with server.rs, service.rs, capabilities.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (42 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 3 Repeated repair finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with authorization.rs, REDACTED, devin_desktop.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).

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

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

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

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

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

0 deducted task-comment markers across 91158 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md.

D19 · Documentation QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

Quotio's documentation is clear and complete for its readers. The repository root README (Quotio) gives a strong overview of the project as 'Your command center for AI coding quotas, accounts, and local agents', plus installation, usage, and an extensive features list, while the apps/cli/README.md documents that directory with architecture details like provider tables, REST API commands, and credential setup. The macOS/iOS app READMEs are well-structured with build/test instructions and a detailed host-contract document for the native Usage and Settings tabs plus six WidgetKit families. All visible sections exist in outline form; no missing section is flagged. The project's documentation is clear, complete, and well-structured: the READMEs for each application (apps/cli/docs/operations.md, apps/cli/docs/provider-coverage.md, apps/cli/docs/release-channels.md, apps/cli/docs/releasing.md) cover installation, usage, release channels, and contribution guidance; architecture/design docs (apps/macos/plans/20260902-clean-architecture-refactor/phase-0-baseline.md) provide detailed baseline and compatibility records. All documents are clipped mid-sentence by the scanner, so trailing sections were not omitted from the outline but cannot be flagged as missing.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

  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 ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyStronggated by 1 serious finding◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

1 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 733 exposed types.

Inconsistent naming for synchronous vs asynchronous state retrieval. While the plural/singular distinction is a common pattern, it creates a slight asymmetry compared to other controllers in the API (e.g., `TunnelLifecycleController` uses `states()` for the stream and has no direct `state()` method, relying on the stream or a separate snapshot property). More critically, `ProxyLifecycleController` exposes both a property `snapshot` (inherited from its controller role or implied context) and a method `snapshot()`. If `snapshot` is a property, `snapshot()` is redundant. If `snapshot` is not a property, the method name is slightly ambiguous compared to `states()`.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for synchronous vs asynchronous state retrieval.… 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.

D26 · Project Cohesion3.3 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 3.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 3 build units (SwiftPM) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split Packages/QuotioCore

What to do

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

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

D27 · Navigability7.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 % of calls cross a namespace and 41 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.

High interface indirection

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 High interface indirection finding(s) in Navigability. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets. 6 detection(s) in paths this repository declares as reviewed specimen content (its credential-scanner allowlist) were excluded.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)7.1 / 10Adequategated by 2 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

2 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 0 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 7 file(s) — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/CustomProviders/CustomProviderAdapters.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/HTTP/ProxyNetworkAdapters.swift` (line 195, line 204, line 209, …), `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Proxy/URLSessionProxyManagementAPI.swift` (line 142, line 143, line 144, …), `apps/cli/scripts/sign-macos.sh` (line 48), `apps/cli/src/accounts/sources.rs` (line 986, lines 1002–1003, lines 1010–1671, …), … (+2 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 1 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities9.8 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Medium advisory (unmaintained) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)9.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Likely personal-data (PII / GDPR) handling concerns — logging or storing data without safeguards.

Method: Heuristic PII/GDPR LEAK scan via semgrep across the repo, using Watchdog's own ruleset: personal data crossing a boundary it should not — reaching a log/console sink, a URL or query string, or unprotected browser storage. Matches map to severity and a 0-10 wide normalizer. A clean sweep is unscored rather than an unearned 10, and is a statement about the leak paths checked only — this dimension does not inventory the personal data a repository holds (the personal-data map and the C1-C5 compliance cards do that), so it never reports that a repository has no personal-data surface. Reported LOUDLY as a measurement gap if the ruleset is missing from the analyzer image. Exhaustive over the leak paths, advisory-leaning; degrades on parse failure.

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

1 finding(s): 0 critical, 0 high, 1 medium, 0 low. semgrep could not parse 51 file(s) — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/HTTP/ProxyNetworkAdapters.swift`, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Platform/ProviderImageCacheAdapter.swift`, … (+46 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d32_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

1 of 261 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/WarpConnectionSheet.swift. Counted over 261 of the 365 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D35 · Change Coupling9.7 / 10Adequategated by 3 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Strongest change-coupling: QuotaCard.swift↔QuotaScreen.swift 90%; QuotioCLIBackend.swift↔QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift 64%; QuotioCLIBackend.swift↔AccountsScreenModel.swift 62%

Boundary-crossing change coupling: RootNavigationView.swift ↔ CompositionRoot.swift · ×3Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/App/RootNavigationView.swift
Change coupling: QuotaCard.swift ↔ QuotaScreen.swift · ×4Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotaCard.swift

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with RootNavigationView.swift, DashboardScreen.swift, StatusBarManager.swift. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with QuotioCLIBackend.swift (2), QuotaCard.swift, config.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).

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

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

M1 · Documentation (README)8.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a README to the 3 of 5 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.2 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation2.0 / 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 — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.

What to do

  • Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
M3 · Folder & project structure8.0 / 10Strong✓ 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.

  • Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.

What to do

  • Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
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 & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

P2 · Observability6.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Only 3/6 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`, `apps/cli/distribution/npm`, `apps/ios`.

What to do

  • Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
  • Add OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry with tracing-opentelemetry) so requests are traceable across the system, not just health-probable.
P3 · Security & performance tooling7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback7.0 / 10Strong✓ 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.

P5 · DR & Backup4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 Health89%StrongSolid.
Architecture92%Adequate — gated by D26Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity66%Adequate — gated by M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness70%AdequateAcceptable, with room to improve.
Security89%StrongSolid.
Domain Modelling100%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Performance100%ExemplarySolid.
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

  • X10 Duplicated predicate — 2 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 3 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
Not included — 77 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .swift suite was found but not re-run
  • D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
  • D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage NOT MEASURED: the Swift half could not be measured — the Swift suite in Packages/QuotioCore produced no coverage export. Coverage is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero. The named suite step is one the repository's maintainers can perform; once it passes, the real number is measured on the next scan. Alternatively, commit the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces and it is read without a re-run.
  • DM1 Aggregate boundaries — no aggregates detected — aggregate-boundary check not applicable
  • DM10 One transaction, one aggregate — no repository writes detected — no operation to judge against the one-aggregate rule
  • DM11 Constructible invalid state — no entities detected — construction-time invariants not assessable
  • DM2 Strongly-typed ids — no id-bearing domain types detected — strongly-typed-id adoption not assessable
  • DM3 Integration-event coupling — no integration events detected — coupling check not applicable
  • DM4 Rich vs anemic model — no data-bearing entities detected — rich-vs-anemic model not assessable
  • DM5 Encapsulated state — no domain entities found — DM5 grades how entities protect their state, and this repository declares none
  • DM7 Repository granularity — no repository abstraction detected (e.g. uses a document session)
  • DM9 Scattered domain decisions — not measured — scattered-decision detection needs expression-level symbol resolution: a comparison operand bound to the member it judges (arm one) and a construction bound to the type it produces (arm two). A Roslyn compilation carries both; arm two alone also runs on any frontend that declares whether a construction is produced or passed, and this target loaded neither
  • ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and this analysis resolves a call's owner only where the receiver's type is written down in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
  • ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
  • ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
  • P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `Benchmark("…")` in a file importing package-benchmark, or package-benchmark in Package.swift, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Swift has 45,074 production line(s), 2 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
  • S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 5 finding(s)
D35 · Change Coupling · Boundary-crossing change coupling · ×3
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: RootNavigationView.swift ↔ CompositionRoot.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/App/RootNavigationView.swift — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/App/RootNavigationView.swift` (context QuotioCore) and `apps/macos/Quotio/App/CompositionRoot.swift` (context macos) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 58% of the time (7 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — 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. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `2bd21cce` fix(macos): restore cliproxyapi management and lifecycle; `8e434313` refactor(macos): remove retired services from the production graph; `fa16a824` refactor(macos): render account and quota state from host snapshots — run `git show` on any of them.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: DashboardScreen.swift ↔ QuotioApp.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/DashboardScreen.swift — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/DashboardScreen.swift` (context QuotioCore) and `apps/macos/Quotio/QuotioApp.swift` (context macos) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 53% of the time (10 of the 19 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — 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. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `ecf3ea0a` refactor!: remove remote proxy mode (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Views/Screens/DashboardScreen.swift` and `Quotio/QuotioApp.swift`); `4b1990d5` refactor!: remove proxy bridge and request history (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Views/Screens/DashboardScreen.swift` and `Quotio/QuotioApp.swift`); `7aea9dc7` fix(proxy): bundle plus binary source (#389) (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Views/Screens/DashboardScreen.swift` and `Quotio/QuotioApp.swift`) — run `git show` on any of them.
  • Boundary-crossing change coupling: StatusBarManager.swift ↔ QuotioApp.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift` (context QuotioCore) and `apps/macos/Quotio/QuotioApp.swift` (context macos) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 50% of the time (8 of the 16 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — 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. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `c65a3478` fix(menubar): follow explicit app appearance (#515) (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Services/StatusBarManager.swift` and `Quotio/QuotioApp.swift`); `dac67f3c` fix(menubar): render native template image to eliminate glow and unfo… (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Services/StatusBarManager.swift` and `Quotio/QuotioApp.swift`); `69987424` feat(menu-bar): stack paired quota metrics across providers (#494) (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Services/StatusBarManager.swift` and `Quotio/QuotioApp.swift`) — run `git show` on any of them.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
Serious — 204 finding(s)
D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×42
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/server.rs apps/cli/src/server.rs:738 — apps/cli/src/server.rs changed 57 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 28 in quotio::server::collect_usage at line 738. 24 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 33 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/server.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs:23 — apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs changed 63 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 25 in quotio::accounts::service::scoped at line 23. 30 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 33 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/service.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs:166 — apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs changed 30 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 40 in quotio::providers::capabilities::capability at line 166. 4 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 26 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/providers/capabilities.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/vault.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/vault.rs:339 — apps/cli/src/accounts/vault.rs changed 46 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in Vault::begin at line 339. 13 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 33 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/vault.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/server/management.rs apps/cli/src/server/management.rs:330 — apps/cli/src/server/management.rs changed 40 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 25 in quotio::server::management::mutate at line 330. 16 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 24 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/server/management.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/main.rs apps/cli/src/main.rs:72 — apps/cli/src/main.rs changed 21 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 47 in quotio::run at line 72. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 18 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/main.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/mod.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/mod.rs:401 — apps/cli/src/accounts/mod.rs changed 51 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in Document::reserve_factory_refresh at line 401. 11 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 40 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/mod.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:526 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift changed 52 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot at line 526. 31 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so the churn is repair rather than feature work. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/api.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/api.rs:25 — apps/cli/src/accounts/api.rs changed 42 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in AccountDto::from at line 25. 11 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 31 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/api.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:55 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift changed 27 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts at line 55. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 24 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/discovery.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/discovery.rs:130 — apps/cli/src/accounts/discovery.rs changed 17 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 39 in Registry::inspect_for at line 130. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/discovery.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/providers/amp.rs apps/cli/src/providers/amp.rs:184 — apps/cli/src/providers/amp.rs changed 23 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 28 in quotio::providers::amp::parse at line 184. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/providers/amp.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: REDACTED REDACTED:904 — REDACTED changed 24 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in quotio::providers::catalog::oauth_editors::open_cursor_database_at_with_hooks at line 904. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- REDACTED`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift:214 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift changed 14 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 29 in AccountRow.body at line 214. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/command.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/command.rs:18 — apps/cli/src/accounts/command.rs changed 12 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 32 in quotio::accounts::command::run_with_vault at line 18. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/command.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/providers/antigravity.rs apps/cli/src/providers/antigravity.rs:290 — apps/cli/src/providers/antigravity.rs changed 24 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in AntigravityProvider::fetch_with_token at line 290. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/providers/antigravity.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/providers/codex.rs apps/cli/src/providers/codex.rs:90 — apps/cli/src/providers/codex.rs changed 20 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 18 in quotio::providers::codex::parse at line 90. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/providers/codex.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/cache.rs apps/cli/src/cache.rs:196 — apps/cli/src/cache.rs changed 12 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 29 in UsageCache::one at line 196. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/cache.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/providers/key_api.rs apps/cli/src/providers/key_api.rs:265 — apps/cli/src/providers/key_api.rs changed 15 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 22 in quotio::providers::key_api::zai at line 265. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/providers/key_api.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/oauth.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/oauth.rs:658 — apps/cli/src/accounts/oauth.rs changed 17 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in OAuthSessionManager::poll_device at line 658. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/oauth.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift:126 — Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 49 in QuotioHostSnapshot.validate at line 126. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift:77 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift changed 12 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 20 in QuotioCLIServerProcess.start at line 77. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/output/text.rs apps/cli/src/output/text.rs:12 — apps/cli/src/output/text.rs changed 10 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in quotio::output::text::render at line 12. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/output/text.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: apps/cli/src/accounts/resolved.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/resolved.rs:453 — apps/cli/src/accounts/resolved.rs changed 10 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 22 in Registry::validate at line 453. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/resolved.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Hotspot: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift:93 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift changed 14 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in StatusBarManager.renderStatusBar at line 93. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • + 17 more in this group — see findings.md.
D10 · Test Quality · No assertions · ×8
  • No assertions: testManualCompletionBelongsToCurrentAttempt Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioApplicationTests/OAuthFlowControllerTests.swift:70 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testUnterminatedStringIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:250 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testNestedBlockCommentIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:257 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testTrailingContentAfterRootIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:261 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testRootThatIsNotAnObjectIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:265 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testDuplicateProviderKeyIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:269 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testNonObjectProviderIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:276 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
  • No assertions: testMissingCommaBetweenMembersIsRejected Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/OpenCodeConfigRegressionTests.swift:292 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×7
  • FileTooLong: MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift — FileTooLong — 1294 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 794 over it, 2.59× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift — FileTooLong — 752 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 252 over it, 1.50× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift — FileTooLong — 713 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 213 over it, 1.43× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift — FileTooLong — 703 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 68% of them inside a single declaration: AgentConfigSheet (11-741). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 203 over it, 1.41× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
  • FileTooLong: Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift — FileTooLong — 605 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 99% of them inside a single declaration: CustomProviderSheet (10-916). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 105 over it, 1.21× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
  • FileTooLong: Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift — FileTooLong — 560 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 93% of them inside a single declaration: ProvidersScreen (7-788). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 60 over it, 1.12× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
  • FileTooLong: QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift — FileTooLong — 529 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 29 over it, 1.06× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×6
  • MethodTooLong: CompositionRoot.makeProduction apps/macos/Quotio/App/CompositionRoot.swift:16 — MethodTooLong — makeProduction runs 180 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 80 over it, 1.80× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • MethodTooLong: AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:253 — MethodTooLong — accountHeader runs 150 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 50 over it, 1.50× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • MethodTooLong: ProvidersScreen.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:159 — MethodTooLong — body runs 131 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 31 over it, 1.31× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • MethodTooLong: AccountRow.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift:214 — MethodTooLong — body runs 125 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 25 over it, 1.25× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • MethodTooLong: OAuthStatusView.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/OAuthSheet.swift:126 — MethodTooLong — body runs 114 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 14 over it, 1.14× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • MethodTooLong: AccountsSettingsScreen.body Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift:21 — MethodTooLong — body runs 103 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 3 over it, 1.03× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×6
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Providers/CustomProviderPresentation.swift:39 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Providers/CustomProviderPresentation.swift:39-48 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Providers/CustomProviderPresentation.swift:68-77 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:471 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:471-480 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:642-651 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:471` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:338 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:338-347 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:559-568 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:338` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1593 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1593-1602 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1674-1683 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:611 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:611-620 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:701-710 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:948 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:948-957 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:1067-1076 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D10 · Test Quality · Skipped test · ×4
  • Skipped test: testLegacyProtectedCredentialIsReadOnlyAndDoesNotResurrectAfterDeletion Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioInfrastructureTests/AccountPersistenceTests.swift:254 — Skipped — throws XCTSkip
  • Skipped test: testRenderAccountsScreenScenarios Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioPresentationTests/AccountsScreenSnapshotTests.swift:15 — Skipped — throws XCTSkip
  • Skipped test: testRenderPairingLayouts Packages/QuotioCore/Tests/QuotioPresentationTests/CompanionScreenModelTests.swift:85 — Skipped — throws XCTSkip
  • Skipped test: testLiveRustTLS Packages/QuotioHostClient/Tests/QuotioHostClientTests/QuotioHostClientTests.swift:31 — Skipped — throws XCTSkip
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×4
  • TooManyMethods: QuotioCLIBackend Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:7 — TooManyMethods — 52 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 22 over it, 1.73× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
  • TooManyMethods: ProxyLifecycleController Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:4 — TooManyMethods — 51 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 21 over it, 1.70× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
  • TooManyMethods: URLSessionProxyManagementAPI Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Proxy/URLSessionProxyManagementAPI.swift:37 — TooManyMethods — 41 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 11 over it, 1.37× the bar. Most of these members implement Packages~QuotioCore~QuotioApplication.ProxyManagementAPI (32 of 39 members), so moving them onto a smaller type would remove them from that contract rather than reduce it. To reduce it, split the contract instead: give each cohesive group of operations its own smaller interface and its own implementing type. Where the contract has to stay whole, move the work behind these members into collaborator types, so what is left here is a forward per member rather than a responsibility per member.
  • TooManyMethods: ProxyManagementScreenModel Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Proxy/ProxyManagementScreenModel.swift:6 — TooManyMethods — 36 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 6 over it, 1.20× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×4
  • Change coupling: QuotaCard.swift ↔ QuotaScreen.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotaCard.swift — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotaCard.swift` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/QuotaScreen.swift` change together 90% of the time (9 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in different directories, but in this ecosystem the namespace is declared in the FILE, not by the folder — so the two may well share one namespace and reference each other with no import for this pass to see. Read the pair before acting: if one derives from or overrides the other, the dependency is explicit in the type declaration and the co-change is definitional; if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE and the thing to add is a comment saying so; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if none of these holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `14fb0933` fix(menubar): render placeholder instead of 101% for no-data quotas (… (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Views/Components/QuotaCard.swift` and `Quotio/Views/Screens/QuotaScreen.swift`); `eebdf03d` feat: enable remote access when Cloudflare tunnel is active (#296) (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Views/Components/QuotaCard.swift` and `Quotio/Views/Screens/QuotaScreen.swift`); `1f1aedbf` feat: Refactor fallback with format conversion and Kiro token managem… (at that commit the files were still `Quotio/Views/Components/QuotaCard.swift` and `Quotio/Views/Screens/QuotaScreen.swift`) — run `git show` on any of them.
  • Change coupling: QuotioCLIBackend.swift ↔ QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift` change together 64% of the time (7 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `3262c1ab` fix(host): persist disabled borrowed sources across refreshes; `720fcc10` refactor(api)!: move host control routes to the default v2 contract; `be274714` refactor(macos): bind monitoring controls to Rust host settings — run `git show` on any of them.
  • Change coupling: QuotioCLIBackend.swift ↔ AccountsScreenModel.swift Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift — `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Accounts/AccountsScreenModel.swift` change together 62% of the time (8 of the 13 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in different directories, but in this ecosystem the namespace is declared in the FILE, not by the folder — so the two may well share one namespace and reference each other with no import for this pass to see. Read the pair before acting: if one derives from or overrides the other, the dependency is explicit in the type declaration and the co-change is definitional; if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE and the thing to add is a comment saying so; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if none of these holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `b5c5bb09` feat(macos): expose logical name and source management actions; `823aaa91` feat(macos): render credential fields declared by the Rust host; `19dffbc4` feat(host): own native discovery and source registration — run `git show` on any of them.
  • Change coupling: config.rs ↔ tests.rs apps/cli/src/config.rs — `apps/cli/src/config.rs` and `apps/cli/src/server/tests.rs` change together 50% of the time (5 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 5 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `3262c1ab` fix(host): persist disabled borrowed sources across refreshes; `65d7ad0d` feat(host): schedule native discovery using persisted tracking settings; `27d44130` fix(usage): preserve helper account and refresh semantics — run `git show` on any of them.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:210 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:210-220 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/QuotaScreen.swift:39-49 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:210` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift:78 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift:78-88 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift:117-127 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift:78` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift:76` calls `padding` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/QuotioButtonStyles.swift:116` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:845 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:845-855 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:914-924 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:845` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/UsageDisplaySettingsSection.swift:32 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/UsageDisplaySettingsSection.swift:32-42 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/UsageDisplaySettingsSection.swift:51-61 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/UsageDisplaySettingsSection.swift:32` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:511 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:511-516 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:633-638 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:511` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Accounts/AntigravitySwitchModels.swift:39 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Accounts/AntigravitySwitchModels.swift:39-44 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Proxy/ProxyModels.swift:258-268 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Persistence/FileAccountMetadataRepository.swift:13 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Persistence/FileAccountMetadataRepository.swift:13-18 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Persistence/FileAccountSnapshotDataStore.swift:7-12 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Agents/AgentModels.swift:166 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Agents/AgentModels.swift:166-171 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Companion/CompanionModels.swift:56-61 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:68 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:68-72 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:82-86 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/ConnectionIssue.swift:36 — apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/ConnectionIssue.swift:36-40 | apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/ConnectionIssue.swift:48-52 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/ConnectionIssue.swift:36` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:122 — apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:122-126 | apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:149-153 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:122` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:148` calls `String` and `apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:121` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/CustomProviders/CustomProviderModels.swift:103 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/CustomProviders/CustomProviderModels.swift:103-107 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Proxy/ProxyModels.swift:210-218 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×4
  • Low cohesion: QuotioCLIBackend (LCOM4 7) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:7 — QuotioCLIBackend's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
  • Low cohesion: String (LCOM4 5) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Accounts/AuthFileRepository.swift:122 — String's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
  • Low cohesion: ProxyManagementScreenModel (LCOM4 4) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Proxy/ProxyManagementScreenModel.swift:6 — ProxyManagementScreenModel's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
  • Low cohesion: WarmupSettingsManager (LCOM4 4) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/WarmupSettingsManager.swift:11 — WarmupSettingsManager's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair · ×3
  • Repeated repair: apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs:7 — apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs changed 6 times in last 90 days and 6 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 7 (its worst body is quotio::accounts::authorization::target at line 7), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(factory): resolve omitted selectors before native authorization”; “fix(factory): freeze exact native Keychain account selectors”; “fix(copilot): bind Keychain authorization and reads to the selected account”; “fix(copilot): prefer file logins and require scoped Keychain access”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/accounts/authorization.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Repeated repair: REDACTED REDACTED:396 — REDACTED changed 5 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 10 (its worst body is quotio::providers::antigravity_auth::visit_fields at line 396), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(antigravity): read unified oauth state and report expired logins”; “fix(cli): stabilize helper signing and suppress background keychain prompts”; “fix(antigravity): validate native protobuf credential structure”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- REDACTED`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
  • Repeated repair: apps/cli/src/providers/catalog/devin_desktop.rs apps/cli/src/providers/catalog/devin_desktop.rs:179 — apps/cli/src/providers/catalog/devin_desktop.rs changed 5 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 11 (its worst body is quotio::providers::catalog::devin_desktop::parse_usage at line 179), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix(devin): expose percent consumption for progress metrics”; “fix(devin): merge native sessions by user and show account email”; “fix(auth): reject unsafe Devin native credential destinations”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-02..2026-09-30, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-02 23:26:29 +07:00' --until='2026-09-30 23:26:29 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- apps/cli/src/providers/catalog/devin_desktop.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×3
  • ClassTooLong: CustomProviderSheet Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift:10 — ClassTooLong — 596 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 10 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 196 over it, 1.49× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
  • ClassTooLong: ProvidersScreen Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:7 — ClassTooLong — 523 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 19 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 123 over it, 1.31× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
  • ClassTooLong: AgentConfigSheet Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:11 — ClassTooLong — 481 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 6 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 81 over it, 1.20× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Process/ProxyProcessController.swift:155 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Process/ProxyProcessController.swift:155-161 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Tunnel/CloudflaredService.swift:120-128 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Process/ProxyProcessController.swift:155` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1198 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1198-1204 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1245-1251 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1198` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1894 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1894-1900 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1981-1987 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:1894` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:77 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:77-92 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/ProxyVersionManagerSheet.swift:42-57 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:77` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:403 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:403-418 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:436-451 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:403` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:98 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:98-106 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:120-128 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:98` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `spacing` to `2` in one and `8` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:114` calls `background`, `Color`, `opacity` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:93` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/DesignSystem/AccountCard.swift:71 — apps/ios/QuotioIOS/DesignSystem/AccountCard.swift:71-79 | apps/ios/QuotioIOS/DesignSystem/EmptyAccountRow.swift:34-42 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `apps/ios/QuotioIOS/DesignSystem/AccountCard.swift:71` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AmpAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:77 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AmpAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:77-82 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/ClaudeCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:101-106 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:73-78 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/FactoryDroidAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:86-91 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:131-136 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 5 call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AmpAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:156 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AmpAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:156-161 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/ClaudeCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:194-199 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:80-85 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/FactoryDroidAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:149-154 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:138-143 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 5 call sites, so a change lands once.
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×2
  • Off the main sequence: QuotioDomain — QuotioDomain: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 3 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: QuotioHostClient — QuotioHostClient: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cyclomatic 49) · ×1
  • QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cyclomatic 49) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift:126 — QuotioHostSnapshot.validate has cyclomatic complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cyclomatic 33) · ×1
  • OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cyclomatic 33) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:220 — OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax has cyclomatic complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AccountRow.body (cyclomatic 29) · ×1
  • AccountRow.body (cyclomatic 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift:214 — AccountRow.body has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cyclomatic 27) · ×1
  • AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cyclomatic 27) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift:21 — AccountsSettingsScreen.body has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cyclomatic 26) · ×1
  • QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cyclomatic 26) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift:14 — QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cyclomatic 26) · ×1
  • ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cyclomatic 26) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:55 — ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotaProvider.entry (cyclomatic 25) · ×1
  • QuotaProvider.entry (cyclomatic 25) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift:61 — QuotaProvider.entry has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString (cyclomatic 24) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift:162 — CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · OpenCodeConfigEditor.deletionRange (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • OpenCodeConfigEditor.deletionRange (cyclomatic 24) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:432 — OpenCodeConfigEditor.deletionRange has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cyclomatic 23) · ×1
  • AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cyclomatic 23) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:253 — AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData (cyclomatic 21) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostHTTPClient.swift:106 — QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotaWidgetView.body (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • QuotaWidgetView.body (cyclomatic 21) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift:119 — QuotaWidgetView.body has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.escapedString (cyclomatic 20) · ×1
  • CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.escapedString (cyclomatic 20) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/CustomProviders/CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.swift:41 — CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.escapedString has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioCLIServerProcess.start (cyclomatic 20) · ×1
  • QuotioCLIServerProcess.start (cyclomatic 20) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift:77 — QuotioCLIServerProcess.start has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric (cyclomatic 20) · ×1
  • QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric (cyclomatic 20) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift:260 — QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ProviderSettingsState.init (cyclomatic 19) · ×1
  • ProviderSettingsState.init (cyclomatic 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Accounts/ProviderSettingsState.swift:22 — ProviderSettingsState.init has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate (cyclomatic 19) · ×1
  • QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate (cyclomatic 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.swift:32 — QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ProvidersScreen.body (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • ProvidersScreen.body (cyclomatic 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:159 — ProvidersScreen.body has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · HostStore.refresh (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • HostStore.refresh (cyclomatic 17) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/HostStore.swift:108 — HostStore.refresh has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ProxyLifecycleController.install (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • ProxyLifecycleController.install (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:236 — ProxyLifecycleController.install has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:145 — OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · KeychainCredentialDataStore.readData (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • KeychainCredentialDataStore.readData (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Credentials/KeychainCredentialStores.swift:81 — KeychainCredentialDataStore.readData has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:526 — QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QuotioCLIBackend.resolvedAccount (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • QuotioCLIBackend.resolvedAccount (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:578 — QuotioCLIBackend.resolvedAccount has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AppSettingsPage.body (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • AppSettingsPage.body (cyclomatic 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AppSettingsPage.swift:15 — AppSettingsPage.body has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cognitive 59) · ×1
  • QuotioHostSnapshot.validate (cognitive 59) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostSnapshot.swift:126 — QuotioHostSnapshot.validate has cognitive complexity 59 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 34, if/else 10 (20 pts), loops 4 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cognitive 58) · ×1
  • OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax (cognitive 58) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:220 — OpenCodeConfigEditor.strippingJSONCSyntax has cognitive complexity 58 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (35 pts), boolean chains 12, loops 5 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 23). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotaWidgetView.body (cognitive 57) · ×1
  • QuotaWidgetView.body (cognitive 57) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift:119 — QuotaWidgetView.body has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 8 (28 pts), if/else 11 (25 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 35). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotaProvider.entry (cognitive 47) · ×1
  • QuotaProvider.entry (cognitive 47) apps/ios/QuotioWidgets/QuotioWidgets.swift:61 — QuotaProvider.entry has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (24 pts), error handling 5 (13 pts), boolean chains 10 (nesting depth added 23). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cognitive 41) · ×1
  • QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot (cognitive 41) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift:14 — QuotioHostPresentationMapper.resolvedSnapshot has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (22 pts), ternaries 2 (7 pts), loops 4 (5 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cognitive 40) · ×1
  • ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts (cognitive 40) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:55 — ProvidersScreen.groupedAccounts has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 8 (13 pts), if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 9, ternaries 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cognitive 35) · ×1
  • AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader (cognitive 35) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift:253 — AccountQuotaCardV2.accountHeader has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (22 pts), boolean chains 7, ternaries 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AccountRow.body (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • AccountRow.body (cognitive 33) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AccountRow.swift:214 — AccountRow.body has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (18 pts), boolean chains 11, ternaries 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString (cognitive 30) · ×1
  • CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString (cognitive 30) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift:162 — CodexConfigurationCodec.scalarString has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), ternaries 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 4, match/switch 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AgentFileStore.apply (cognitive 29) · ×1
  • AgentFileStore.apply (cognitive 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AgentFileStore.swift:59 — AgentFileStore.apply has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (19 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), error handling 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate (cognitive 29) · ×1
  • QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate (cognitive 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.swift:32 — QuotioCLILegacyAccountMigration.migrate has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), boolean chains 6, error handling 4 (6 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ProvidersScreen.body (cognitive 29) · ×1
  • ProvidersScreen.body (cognitive 29) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/ProvidersScreen.swift:159 — ProvidersScreen.body has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (26 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenCodeConfigEditor.deletionRange (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • OpenCodeConfigEditor.deletionRange (cognitive 28) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:432 — OpenCodeConfigEditor.deletionRange has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 14, if/else 6 (9 pts), loops 4 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Parser.skipTrivia (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • Parser.skipTrivia (cognitive 28) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:600 — Parser.skipTrivia has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (14 pts), loops 3 (9 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ProviderSettingsState.init (cognitive 27) · ×1
  • ProviderSettingsState.init (cognitive 27) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Accounts/ProviderSettingsState.swift:22 — ProviderSettingsState.init has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 pts), boolean chains 8, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.runManagementFlow (cognitive 27) · ×1
  • LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.runManagementFlow (cognitive 27) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift:88 — LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.runManagementFlow has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), error handling 3 (7 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • AccountsSettingsScreen.body (cognitive 26) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AccountsSettingsScreen.swift:21 — AccountsSettingsScreen.body has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (18 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 3, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 1). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ProxyLifecycleController.install (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • ProxyLifecycleController.install (cognitive 25) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:236 — ProxyLifecycleController.install has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), boolean chains 6, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cognitive 24) · ×1
  • QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot (cognitive 24) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIBackend.swift:526 — QuotioCLIBackend.loadSnapshot has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), boolean chains 6, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · KeychainCredentialDataStore.readData (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • KeychainCredentialDataStore.readData (cognitive 23) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Credentials/KeychainCredentialStores.swift:81 — KeychainCredentialDataStore.readData has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioCLIServerProcess.start (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • QuotioCLIServerProcess.start (cognitive 22) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIServerProcess.swift:77 — QuotioCLIServerProcess.start has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (12 pts), boolean chains 7, match/switch 1 (2 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric (cognitive 22) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioHostPresentationMapper.swift:260 — QuotioHostPresentationMapper.metric has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 9, if/else 7 (9 pts), match/switch 2, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CodexConfigurationCodec.snapshot (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • CodexConfigurationCodec.snapshot (cognitive 21) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift:35 — CodexConfigurationCodec.snapshot has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OAuthStatusView.body (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • OAuthStatusView.body (cognitive 21) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/OAuthSheet.swift:126 — OAuthStatusView.body has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), ternaries 2 (8 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 10). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AppSettingsPage.body (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • AppSettingsPage.body (cognitive 21) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/AppSettingsPage.swift:15 — AppSettingsPage.body has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), boolean chains 5, match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData (cognitive 20) Packages/QuotioHostClient/Sources/QuotioHostClient/QuotioHostHTTPClient.swift:106 — QuotioHostHTTPClient.responseData has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 12, if/else 8. To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HostStore.refresh (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • HostStore.refresh (cognitive 20) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/HostStore.swift:108 — HostStore.refresh has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (11 pts), boolean chains 7, error handling 2 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CodexConfigurationCodec.filteredLines (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • CodexConfigurationCodec.filteredLines (cognitive 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CodexConfigurationCodec.swift:217 — CodexConfigurationCodec.filteredLines has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenCodeConfigEditor.merging (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • OpenCodeConfigEditor.merging (cognitive 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:70 — OpenCodeConfigEditor.merging has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (13 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FileProxyConfigurationRepository.ensureAPIKey (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • FileProxyConfigurationRepository.ensureAPIKey (cognitive 19) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Proxy/FileProxyConfigurationRepository.swift:96 — FileProxyConfigurationRepository.ensureAPIKey has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult (cognitive 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:145 — OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.configurationResult has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 2 (6 pts), error handling 3 (5 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenCodeConfigEditor.insertion (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • OpenCodeConfigEditor.insertion (cognitive 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeConfigEditor.swift:379 — OpenCodeConfigEditor.insertion has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (7 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 2 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AntigravityAccountSwitcher.switchAccount (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • AntigravityAccountSwitcher.switchAccount (cognitive 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Antigravity/AntigravityAccountSwitcher.swift:106 — AntigravityAccountSwitcher.switchAccount has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 2, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CompanionConnectionSetupView.body (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • CompanionConnectionSetupView.body (cognitive 18) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Settings/CompanionConnectionSetupView.swift:9 — CompanionConnectionSetupView.body has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (11 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.keyBlock (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.keyBlock (cognitive 17) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/CustomProviders/CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.swift:110 — CustomProviderYAMLSerializer.keyBlock has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · GitHubAtomProxyUpdateFeed.latestVersion (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • GitHubAtomProxyUpdateFeed.latestVersion (cognitive 17) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Updates/GitHubAtomProxyUpdateFeed.swift:35 — GitHubAtomProxyUpdateFeed.latestVersion has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (13 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), error handling 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StatusBarManager.renderStatusBar (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • StatusBarManager.renderStatusBar (cognitive 17) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarManager.swift:93 — StatusBarManager.renderStatusBar has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PairHostView.body (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • PairHostView.body (cognitive 17) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/PairHostView.swift:21 — PairHostView.body has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ProxyLifecycleController.activate (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • ProxyLifecycleController.activate (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:348 — ProxyLifecycleController.activate has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.modelConfiguration (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.modelConfiguration (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:231 — OpenCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.modelConfiguration has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8, boolean chains 4, ternaries 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioCLIOAuthAuthorizer.begin (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • QuotioCLIOAuthAuthorizer.begin (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCLIOAuthAuthorizer.swift:19 — QuotioCLIOAuthAuthorizer.begin has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 6, if/else 4 (6 pts), error handling 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuotioCompanionService.configure (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • QuotioCompanionService.configure (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/QuotioCLI/QuotioCompanionService.swift:74 — QuotioCompanionService.configure has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (11 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StatusBarMenuRenderer.buildMenu (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • StatusBarMenuRenderer.buildMenu (cognitive 16) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:104 — StatusBarMenuRenderer.buildMenu has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), loops 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DisplayNames.metricLabel (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • DisplayNames.metricLabel (cognitive 16) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:62 — DisplayNames.metricLabel has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (8 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DisplayNames.resetHint (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • DisplayNames.resetHint (cognitive 16) apps/ios/Sources/QuotioMobile/DisplayNames.swift:166 — DisplayNames.resetHint has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (9 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RootView.body (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • RootView.body (cognitive 16) apps/ios/QuotioIOS/RootView.swift:11 — RootView.body has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 6, if/else 4, ternaries 1 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming for synchronous vs asynchronous state retrieval. While the plural/singular distinction is a common pattern, it creates a slight asymmetry compared to other controllers in the API (e.g., `TunnelLifecycleController` uses `states()` for the stream and has no direct `state()` method, relying on the stream or a separate snapshot property). More critically, `ProxyLifecycleController` exposes both a property `snapshot` (inherited from its controller role or implied context) and a method `snapshot()`. If `snapshot` is a property, `snapshot()` is redundant. If `snapshot` is not a property, the method name is slightly ambiguous compared to `states()`. · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for synchronous vs asynchronous state retrieval. While the plural/singular distinction is a common pattern, it creates a slight asymmetry compared to other controllers in the API (e.g., `TunnelLifecycleController` uses `states()` for the stream and has no direct `state()` method, relying on the stream or a separate snapshot property). More critically, `ProxyLifecycleController` exposes both a property `snapshot` (inherited from its controller role or implied context) and a method `snapshot()`. If `snapshot` is a property, `snapshot()` is redundant. If `snapshot` is not a property, the method name is slightly ambiguous compared to `states()`. — Ensure consistent naming across all LifecycleControllers. If `ProxyLifecycleController` has a `snapshot` property, remove the `snapshot()` method. If it does not, rename `snapshot()` to `currentSnapshot()` to distinguish it from the stream `snapshots()`, or align with `TunnelLifecycleController` by exposing a `snapshot` property and removing the method. (signatures: ProxyLifecycleController.snapshot(): Packages~QuotioCore~ProxySnapshot | ProxyLifecycleController.snapshots(): AsyncStream<ProxySnapshot>)
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unmaintained) · ×1
  • REDACTED
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) · ×1
  • Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:62 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:62-74 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/CopilotAvailableModelCatalog.swift:76-88 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 12 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (7 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (7 members, 50+ identical tokens) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:40 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:40-78 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Quota/QuotaPorts.swift:69-99 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Proxy/ProxyManagementModels.swift:23-61 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Proxy/ProxyModels.swift:290-326 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Settings/PreferenceValues.swift:107-135 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Proxy/ProxyManagementScreenModel.swift:40-72 | apps/macos/Quotio/App/CompositionRoot.swift:293-343 — These 7 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 7 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 7 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift:233 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift:233-255 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Shared/ProviderPresentation.swift:5-27 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Shared/ProviderPresentation.swift:29-51 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Shared/ProviderPresentation.swift:103-125 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:63 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:63-91 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/DashboardScreen.swift:392-420 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:63` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift:335 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift:335-353 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift:496-514 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift:335` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift:515` calls `sheet`, `ProxyVersionManagerSheet`, `environment` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Screens/AboutScreen.swift:354` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 4) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift:235 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift:235-252 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Shared/ProviderPresentation.swift:7-24 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Shared/ProviderPresentation.swift:31-48 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Shared/ProviderPresentation.swift:105-122 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Accounts/LocalProxyOAuthAuthorizer.swift:235` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:66 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:66-82 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/WarpConnectionSheet.swift:86-102 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:66` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `spacing` to `20` in one and `4` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:756 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:756-770 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:786-800 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:852-866 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/AgentConfigSheet.swift:756` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift:103 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift:103-115 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/GLMAPIKeySheet.swift:44-55 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/CustomProviderSheet.swift:103` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/MenuBarBadge.swift:52 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/MenuBarBadge.swift:52-62 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/MenuTooltipPresenter.swift:43-55 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/MenuBarBadge.swift:52` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/SwitchAccountSheet.swift:55 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/SwitchAccountSheet.swift:55-67 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/WarmupSheet.swift:143-155 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/SwitchAccountSheet.swift:55` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 7) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 7) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:59 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:59-70 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Quota/QuotaPorts.swift:84-95 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Proxy/ProxyManagementModels.swift:42-53 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Proxy/ProxyModels.swift:308-319 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Settings/PreferenceValues.swift:121-132 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Proxy/ProxyManagementScreenModel.swift:54-65 | apps/macos/Quotio/App/CompositionRoot.swift:318-329 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 7 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 7 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioApplication/Proxy/ProxyLifecycleController.swift:59` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:163 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:163-170 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:223-230 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:294-301 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:163` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:161` calls `background`, `Color`, `opacity` and `Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/TunnelSheet.swift:222` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Quota/QuotaModels.swift:31 — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Quota/QuotaModels.swift:31-38 | Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioDomain/Quota/QuotaModels.swift:132-139 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D8 · Code Coverage · Coverage not measured · ×1
  • Coverage not measured — Swift suite — Coverage NOT MEASURED: the Swift half could not be measured — the Swift suite in Packages/QuotioCore produced no coverage export. Coverage is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero. The named suite step is one the repository's maintainers can perform; once it passes, the real number is measured on the next scan. Alternatively, commit the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces and it is read without a re-run.
Minor — 11 finding(s)
X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×2
  • Duplicated predicate Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift:519 — `lowercased.contains("free") || lowercased.contains("standard")` appears character-identically in 2 files — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/MenuBar/StatusBarMenuRenderer.swift, Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Quota/ProviderQuotaView.swift. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AmpAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift:164 — `value?.contains("127.0.0.1") == true || value?.contains("localhost") == true` appears character-identically in 3 files — Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/AmpAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift, Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/ClaudeCodeAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift, Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioInfrastructure/Agents/FactoryDroidAgentConfigurationAdapter.swift. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D26 · Project Cohesion · Split Packages/QuotioCore · ×1
  • Split Packages/QuotioCore — A generic catch-all name that is huge (35k LoC) and sprawls across 57 namespaces with no coherent theme. Suggested:
D27 · Navigability · High interface indirection · ×1
  • High interface indirection — 41 % of calls go through an interface — tracing a call means resolving the implementation each hop. Prefer concrete types where there's a single implementation.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
  • Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 1 of 261 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 261 of the 365 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: Packages/QuotioCore/Sources/QuotioPresentation/Components/WarpConnectionSheet.swift. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1
  • No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M3 · Folder & project structure · No src/ separation · ×1
  • No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1
  • Logging is not universal — Only 3/6 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `.`, `apps/cli/distribution/npm`, `apps/ios`.
Minor — 2 finding(s)
D10 · Test Quality · Skipped (documented) · ×1
  • Skipped (documented): liveRustTLSUsesPairedTrustWithAppTransportSecurity apps/ios/QuotioIOSUnitTests/HostStoreTests.swift:62 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: conditionally enabled — runs only when its .enabled(if:) condition holds
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×1
  • Outdated: sparkle — `sparkle` is resolved at 2.8.1, but 2.10.0 is the newest release tagged on https://github.com/sparkle-project/Sparkle within the same major. SwiftPM resolves from git tags, and a `from:` requirement admits every release below the next major — so `swift package update sparkle` reaches this one with no change to Package.swift.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-d3b2b816ae7b452f8b213a08151b9fde/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .6artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-d3b2b816ae7b452f8b213a08151b9fde/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .1artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .2artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update1artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.0—
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/gdpr.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .1artifacts/raw/semgrep-gdpr.json
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0—
D40 · Network Egress Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D43 · Malicious Dependenciestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a0f3ec-2eab-7f2a-82c8-e9b65889eff1 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Issues: 5 · Warnings: 204 · Recommendations: 11 · Info: 2 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 30-09-2026 @ 20:05 UTC.

Downloadable artifacts

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

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