Public report of nikic/PHP-Parser, published 24 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive report Measured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey → Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 24 October 2026, 22:19 UTC · Survey ID cd_37c22f0426224bf4835279457788963d

nikic/PHP-Parser

Measured 24 October 2026, 22:17 UTC, at code version 8d2b672

No regression since the last survey Supply-chain provenance & signing: not measured

A regression is a drop of 0.5 points or more in the score, or of 2.5 or more out of 10 in a dimension, since the last survey.

Supply-chain provenance & signing is not measured: Supply-chain provenance is not scored (this pipeline releases no artifact), but its build steps or GitHub Actions workflows have integrity defects, or nothing watches its dependency set for published advisories.

CAI score 59out of 100 Adequate
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Up 1 since the last survey

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

Security and Compliance 92 Exemplary Architecture 88 Adequate Code Health 65 Adequate Production Readiness 58 Adequate Maturity 49 Weak

A medium codebase: 22,214 lines of product code in 2 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.2 person-years · Weakest lens: Maturity, 49

Findings by how serious they are

13 critical 91 serious 28 minor

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

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
24 October 2026, 22:17 UTC

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

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

42of 46 dimensions measured by tools. The other 4 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
118of 132 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 14 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
46dimensions across 5 lenses, read from 22,214 lines of product code in 2 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

nikic/PHP-Parser scores 59 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while three of its five lenses score higher still: Security and Compliance at 92, rated Exemplary, and Architecture at 88 and Code Health at 65, both rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those three because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 49 and is rated Weak. Its Architecture documentation dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality and to record your significant design decisions, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 59 to about 65.

13 findings are critical, all in Static Analysis (SAST).

Watchdog couldn't measure 18 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 22,214 lines, which would take an estimated 0.2 person-years, around €31,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 65 Adequate, capped by Nullable reference types Architecture 88 Adequate, capped by Project Cohesion Maturity 49 Weak, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 58 Adequate, capped by Observability Security and Compliance 92 ★ Exemplary

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

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Maturity 49 · counts for 47%Production Readiness 58 · counts for 26%Code Health 65 · counts for 14%Architecture 88 · counts for 8%Security and Compliance 92 · counts for 4%

If Maturity rose from 49 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 59 to about 65.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 76%Tests 24%
New since the last survey: 1 finding

This critical or serious finding wasn't in the previous survey, on 10 October 2026.

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

Fixed since the last survey: 1 finding

This critical or serious finding was in the previous survey, on 10 October 2026, and is gone from this one.

  • Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Rebuild cost: about €31,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€10,000 to €51,000, for 170 to 540 hours of work, about 0.2 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problemStandard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor×0.8 at a score of 59. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
SizeMedium: 22,214 lines of product code

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

Top priorities

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

1
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
Raises the score by about 8 points · Low effort · ADR Quality
2
Record your significant design decisions.
Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Raises the score by about 8 points · Medium effort · Architecture documentation
3
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Documentation (README)

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

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

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €31,000 to build again, about 0.2 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 49 (Weak). Maturity is about how well the project explains and looks after itself, which decides whether a new developer, or a new supplier, can take over. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Maturity also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Maturity grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Maturity actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 8 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 ADR Quality findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

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

22 modules, with 46 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 10 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 grammar2 test_old3 PhpParser.Comment4 PhpParser.Node.Expr5 PhpParser.Node6 PhpParser.Node.Expr.AssignOp7 PhpParser.Node.Expr.BinaryOp8 PhpParser.Node.Expr.Cast9 PhpParser.Builder10 PhpParser.Internal11 PhpParser.Node.Name12 PhpParser.Node.Scalar13 PhpParser.Node.Stmt14 PhpParser15 PhpParser.Node.Scalar.MagicConst16 PhpParser.Node.Stmt.TraitUseAdaptation17 PhpParser.ErrorHandler18 PhpParser.Lexer19 PhpParser.Lexer.TokenEmulator20 PhpParser.NodeVisitor21 PhpParser.Parser22 PhpParser.PrettyPrinter
1 grammar
2 test_old
3 PhpParser.Comment1
4 PhpParser.Node.Expr4712
5 PhpParser.Node224
6 PhpParser.Node.Expr.AssignOp13
7 PhpParser.Node.Expr.BinaryOp28
8 PhpParser.Node.Expr.Cast8
9 PhpParser.Builder1023
10 PhpParser.Internal12
11 PhpParser.Node.Name2
12 PhpParser.Node.Scalar5
13 PhpParser.Node.Stmt1665
14 PhpParser3141711431110
15 PhpParser.Node.Scalar.MagicConst9
16 PhpParser.Node.Stmt.TraitUseAdaptation32
17 PhpParser.ErrorHandler4
18 PhpParser.Lexer3
19 PhpParser.Lexer.TokenEmulator16
20 PhpParser.NodeVisitor216
21 PhpParser.Parser2
22 PhpParser.PrettyPrinter4221132882441292
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 grammar2 test_old3 PhpParser.Comment4 PhpParser.Node.Expr5 PhpParser.Node6 PhpParser.Node.Expr.AssignOp7 PhpParser.Node.Expr.BinaryOp8 PhpParser.Node.Expr.Cast9 PhpParser.Builder10 PhpParser.Internal11 PhpParser.Node.Name12 PhpParser.Node.Scalar13 PhpParser.Node.Stmt14 PhpParser15 PhpParser.Node.Scalar.MagicConst16 PhpParser.Node.Stmt.TraitUseAdaptation17 PhpParser.ErrorHandler18 PhpParser.Lexer19 PhpParser.Lexer.TokenEmulator20 PhpParser.NodeVisitor21 PhpParser.Parser22 PhpParser.PrettyPrintergrammar1test_old2PhpParser.Comment3PhpParser.Node.Expr4PhpParser.Node5PhpParser.Node.Expr.AssignOp6PhpParser.Node.Expr.BinaryOp7PhpParser.Node.Expr.Cast8PhpParser.Builder9PhpParser.Internal10PhpParser.Node.Name11PhpParser.Node.Scalar12PhpParser.Node.Stmt13PhpParser14PhpParser.Node.Scalar.MagicConst15PhpParser.Node.Stmt.TraitUseAdaptation16PhpParser.ErrorHandler17PhpParser.Lexer18PhpParser.Lexer.TokenEmulator19PhpParser.NodeVisitor20PhpParser.Parser21PhpParser.PrettyPrinter2214712224132881023122516653141711431110932431621624221132882441292

At a glance — Code Health · 65% · Adequate · gated by X5 ·

The Good
D1 · PHP Cyclomatic Complexity 7.7 D3 · PHP God Classes 8.8 D4 · PHP Code Duplication 9.8 D17 · PHP Explicit Debt 9.9 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X3 · Repo Exception handling 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0
The Bad
D2 · PHP Cognitive Complexity 5.7
The Ugly
X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 3.5 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 2.0

At a glance — Architecture · 88% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

The Good
D6 · PHP Cohesion (LCOM4) 9.6 D22 · PHP Internal API Consistency 9.0 D27 · PHP Navigability 8.9 D35 · PHP Change Coupling 9.9 AX10 · Repo Code composition 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0
The Ugly
D26 · PHP Project Cohesion 0.0

At a glance — Maturity · 49% · Weak · gated by M2 ·

The Good
D15 · PHP Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D16 · PHP Bus Factor 9.1 D19 · PHP Documentation Quality 9.5 D21 · PHP Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · PHP Knowledge Freshness 9.3 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 8.0
The Ugly
D20 · PHP ADR Quality 0.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 4.5 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 58% · Adequate · gated by P2 ·

The Good
D9 · PHP Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · PHP Test Quality 9.9 D13 · PHP Secret Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0
The Ugly
P2 · Repo Observability 0.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 4.0

At a glance — Security · 92% · Exemplary ·

The Good
D28 · PHP Secrets (history) 10.0 D29 · PHP Static Analysis (SAST) 8.4 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 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
A05:2025 — Injection13High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by establishing architectural governance by documenting significant design decisions in a dedicated ADR folder and adding a quick-start section to the root README for new contributors. Strengthen reliability by implementing verbose logging to capture diagnostic trails for bug reports and raising static analysis levels to enforce strict nullable reference type checking. Finally, systematically resolve the surfaced nullness errors to eliminate silent failures and ensure code correctness.

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.+8.5 ptsLowADR Quality
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.+7.5 ptsMediumArchitecture documentation
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.+5.0 ptsMediumDocumentation (README)
Write a diagnostic trail the user can hand back with a bug report: a log file under the platform's per-user data directory, switchable with a `--verbose`/`--debug` flag. Start with the error paths that emit nothing — a discarded error is the failure the user cannot describe and you cannot reproduce.+4.3 ptsMediumObservability
Raise PHPStan to level 8 (`level: 8` in `phpstan.neon.dist`, or `max`) or Psalm to `errorLevel="3"` or stricter, so `?Type` is a type the checker holds you to; generate a baseline for what that surfaces only to pay it down, not to keep it. Then resolve the baselined nullness errors rather than adding to them: each is a call on a value the checker showed could be null — narrow it (`if ($x === null) { … }`, `?->`, an early return), make the property non-nullable and initialise it in the constructor, or change the return type so the null cannot arrive.+3.6 ptsMediumNullable reference types
Resolve the 4 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with phpyLang.php, TraitUseAdaptation.php, ClassConst.php.+0.9 ptsLowKnowledge Freshness
Reconcile the README with reality: doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\Variable`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/Variable` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\FuncCall`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/FuncCall` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\String_`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/String_` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\LNumber`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/LNumber` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\MagicConst\File`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/MagicConst/File` exists.+1.6 ptsMediumDocumentation accuracy
Resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor.+0.7 ptsLowBus Factor

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 30 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 3% slop · 47% mixed · 50% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED2.3SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php5.5MixedCyclomatic Complexity: ParserAbstract.doParse (cyclomatic 43)
lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php5.6MixedCyclomatic Complexity: Php7.initReduceCallbacks (cyclomatic 22)
lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php6.0MixedExplicit Debt: FixmeComment
lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AttributeEmulator.php6.7MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php7.1MixedCyclomatic Complexity: NodeTraverser.traverseArray (cyclomatic 24)
lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php7.1MixedCyclomatic Complexity: Php8.initReduceCallbacks (cyclomatic 22)
lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard.php7.2MixedCognitive Complexity: Standard.pScalar_String (cognitive 26)
REDACTED7.2MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: NameResolver.enterNode (cyclomatic 51)
lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenPolyfill.php7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: TokenPolyfill.tokenize (cyclomatic 19)
lib/PhpParser/NodeDumper.php7.8MixedCyclomatic Complexity: NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cyclomatic 37)
lib/PhpParser/Internal/Differ.php7.8MixedCognitive Complexity: Differ.calculateTrace (cognitive 18)
lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/VoidCastEmulator.php7.8MixedCognitive Complexity: VoidCastEmulator.emulate (cognitive 18)
test/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterTest.php7.8MixedTest Quality: No assertions: testPrettyPrint
lib/PhpParser/Comment.php8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenStream.php8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
lib/PhpParser/NameContext.php8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: NameContext.getPossibleNames (cognitive 21)
lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/CommentAnnotatingVisitor.php8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: CommentAnnotatingVisitor.enterNode (cognitive 20)
lib/PhpParser/Lexer/Emulative.php8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: Emulative.fixupTokens (cognitive 18)

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 — 13

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 — 91

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 — 28

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

Could not be resolved — 20

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. 42 of 46 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 46 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D6D9D10D13D15D16D17D19D20D21D22D26D27D28D29D34D35AX10AX3AX4M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P6X14X15X16X18X19X21X22X23X25X28X3X30X5

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, 118 of 132 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 01a16ffd-46e9-7e85-8b7b-416c205b35ea.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

  • D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT READ here — but this repository measures it: a coverage step in CI (`phpunit --coverage`) shows that coverage is collected and tracked in your own CI. The built-in collector has no runner for this ecosystem (.php), so the analyzer could not read the number — a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not an unmeasured repo. Not scored. To have the real number read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (Clover XML — with Xdebug (`XDEBUG_MODE=coverage`) or PCOV installed, `vendor/bin/phpunit --coverage-clover coverage.xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (Clover XML — with Xdebug (`XDEBUG_MODE=coverage`) or PCOV installed, `vendor/bin/phpunit --coverage-clover coverage.xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
  • D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.php) but the built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem, so flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This repository's dependency manifest (composer.json) was found, but this pass cannot parse it for hygiene, so no package was assessed. Zero packages read is NOT a clean dependency tree, so this is NOT SCORED — a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository. This row is about dependency HYGIENE — outdated, deprecated or unmaintained direct dependencies; known CVEs in the same dependency graph are a separate question, reported under D30 wherever the manifest is OSV-readable.
  • D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository declares a composer.json but commits no composer.lock this pass can read, so the set of packages it installs is not on disk: its composer.json states version CONSTRAINTS, and Composer's guidance is that a library leaves the lock uncommitted. Producing the graph needs Composer's solver, which this pass does not run, and grading whichever release happens to be newest today would be a verdict about a dependency graph nobody resolved. NOT a finding that this repository's licences are compliant: this dimension asserts nothing about its licensing in either direction.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a Dockerfile) is simply not read here yet.
  • AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's , PHP is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's , PHP is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — 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 recognises outbound HTTP clients, their timeouts and resilience policies, and service entry points in .NET, Go, JVM, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, PHP, Rust, Elixir, Swift, Dart and Erlang. No service entry point was found in the PHP source it does read, and the rest of this repository's production source is , which it does not read yet — the service may well be there — a gap in this analyzer's language reach, not a finding about the code.
  • 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby and Python source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby or Python was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found, and this repository's PHP is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded, and this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript, Python and PHP make no call through a named logger, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • 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.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (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").
  • 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.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D22, 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 Complexity7.7 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

11 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray at 60. A further 1 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 ConstExprEvaluator.evaluateBinaryOp at 35 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 1 file carries no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of its over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: lib/PhpParser/ConstExprEvaluator.php (ConstExprEvaluator.evaluateBinaryOp at 35). 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.

PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cyclomatic 60)lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:785
NameResolver.enterNode (cyclomatic 51)lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php:55
ParserAbstract.doParse (cyclomatic 43)lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:229
NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cyclomatic 37)lib/PhpParser/NodeDumper.php:69
PrettyPrinterAbstract.p (cyclomatic 32)lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:604

+ 6 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Bring the 11 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cyclomatic 60), NameResolver.enterNode (cyclomatic 51), ParserAbstract.doParse (cyclomatic 43). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 11 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 7.7 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
  2. 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 Complexity5.7 / 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 5.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

24 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray at 142.

PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cognitive 142)lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:785
ParserAbstract.doParse (cognitive 104)lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:229
NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cognitive 78)lib/PhpParser/NodeDumper.php:69
PrettyPrinterAbstract.p (cognitive 63)lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:604
TokenPolyfill.tokenize (cognitive 59)lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenPolyfill.php:124

+ 19 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Bring the 4 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cognitive 142), ParserAbstract.doParse (cognitive 104), NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cognitive 78). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 4 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 5.7 to about 6.6/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; a cleaner split scores higher.
  2. Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D3 · God Classes8.8 / 10Strong✓ 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 8.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

18 god class(es) detected.

MethodTooLong: Php8.initReduceCallbacks · ×5lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php:1276
ClassTooLong: Php8 · ×5lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php:19
FileTooLong: Parser/Php8.php · ×5lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php
TooManyMethods: Standard · ×3lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard.php:16

What to do

  1. Resolve the 5 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with Php8.php, Php7.php, PrettyPrinterAbstract.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 5 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with Php8.php, Php7.php, PrettyPrinterAbstract.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 5 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with Php8.php, Php7.php, PrettyPrinterAbstract.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 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 12 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

12 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×3lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AttributeEmulator.php:21
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×2lib/PhpParser/Node/Stmt/Goto_.php:19
Duplicated block (22 lines × 2)lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:130
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3)lib/PhpParser/Builder/Class_.php:111
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:119

+ 4 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with AttributeEmulator.php, VoidCastEmulator.php, AsymmetricVisibilityTokenEmulator.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Goto_.php, Error.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with NodeTraverser.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.6 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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

1 of 33 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: ParserAbstract (LCOM4 10)lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:39

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with ParserAbstract.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 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 Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

306 test methods: 306 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality9.9 / 10Stronggated by 2 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 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

2 skipped (2 with a documented reason), 2 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 306 tests.

No assertions: testPrettyPrint · ×2test/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterTest.php:40
Skipped (documented): testNormalizeValueEnum · ×2test/PhpParser/BuilderHelpersTest.php:227

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with PrettyPrinterTest.php (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. 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.

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.

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

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D16 · Bus Factor9.1 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

5 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is test_old/run.php. Counted over 56 of the 278 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D17 · Explicit Debt9.9 / 10Stronggated by 14 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

14 deducted task-comment markers across 22214 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.9. 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.

TodoComment · ×13lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:581
FixmeCommentlib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:62

What to do

  1. Resolve the 13 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with PrettyPrinterAbstract.php (10), Comment.php, TokenStream.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 FixmeComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with PrettyPrinterAbstract.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

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

This repository's documentation is excellent. The root README (README.md) gives a clear overview of the project and its versioning, lists features, and shows a complete quick-start example parsing PHP into an AST and dumping it. It also documents the supported versions and exceptions with concrete examples. A dedicated doc/ directory contains comprehensive component-level documentation for every file in the repository: each README there is a self-contained guide to that directory's files (e.g. 'Table of Contents', 'Guide', 'Usage of basic components'), covering AST traversal, name resolution, pretty printing, error handling, constant expression evaluation, and the lexer with emulation layers. The grammar/README explains what each .y/.phpy file does and how the rebuildParsers.php script builds parsers, while the doc/component/FAQ.md answers specific questions about parent/sibling references and cyclic reference impact. All documents are well-structured with headings and a clear ordering. The project's documentation is strong and well-structured: three README files (one on name resolution, one on performance, one on walking the AST) cover the core features of PHP-Parser. Each document has a clear title and an overview paragraph; the NameResolution doc explains what it does and its design rationale, while Performance covers real-world tradeoffs like Xdebug overhead and assertions. The Walking_the_AST doc is the longest at 1700 words and gives the most detailed traversal example of any file, showing both visitor registration and the enter/leaveNode ordering. All three documents are self-contained and describe their own directories; no architecture or contribution docs appear in this set.

✓ 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 2 serious findings◐ 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

2 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 260 exposed types.

Inconsistent naming convention for factory methods creating builder types. Most methods use the singular noun of the type (e.g., `class`, `interface`, `method`, `param`), but these two use the plural or compound noun (`useTrait`, `traitUseAdaptation`).
Inconsistent naming for related operations. `use` is generic, while `useFunction` and `useConst` are specific. However, `useTrait` (from the previous inconsistency) is also a specific use case but named differently. More critically, `use` vs `useFunction`/`useConst` implies a hierarchy that isn't reflected in the base name `use` being ambiguous.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming convention for factory methods creating builder… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for related operations. `use` is generic, while… 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 Cohesion0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 2 build units (Composer) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

D27 · Navigability8.9 / 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. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

35 % of calls cross a namespace and 1 % go through an interface, but 44 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.

What to do

  1. Improve Navigability — currently 8.9/10. — 35 % of calls cross a namespace and 1 % go through an interface, but 44 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)8.4 / 10Adequategated by 13 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 8.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

13 finding(s): 0 critical, 13 high, 0 medium, 0 low. 12 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. 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
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 12 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

4 of 56 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is grammar/phpyLang.php. Counted over 56 of the 278 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned file · ×4grammar/phpyLang.php:1
Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D35 · Change Coupling9.9 / 10Stronggated by 2 serious 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 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: Php7.php↔Php8.php 88%; DNumber.php↔LNumber.php 50%

Change coupling: Php7.php ↔ Php8.php · ×2lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php:1

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with Php7.php, DNumber.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

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

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition10.0 / 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.

M1 · Documentation (README)4.5 / 10Weak✓ 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.

  • 21 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.

What to do

  • Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
  • Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
  • Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
  • Add a README to the 1 of 1 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
  • Review the README against recent changes; refresh the parts that drifted.
M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
  • No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

What to do

  • Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
  • Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

M4 · Documentation accuracy8.0 / 10Strong◐ 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.

  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\Variable`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/Variable` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:185
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\FuncCall`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/FuncCall` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:185
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\String_`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/String_` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:187
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\LNumber`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/LNumber` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:187
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\MagicConst\File`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/MagicConst/File` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:188
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Arg`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Arg` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:191
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `Node\Stmt\Expression`, but no file or folder `Node/Stmt/Expression` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:193
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\PrettyPrinter\Standard`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:221
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\NodeVisitor\NameResolver`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:373
  • doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown documents the environment variable `A_B`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:399
  • doc/component/Lexer.markdown names `PhpParser\Lexer\Emulative`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Lexer/Emulative` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/component/Lexer.markdown:30
  • doc/component/Name_resolution.markdown names `Node\Name\FullyQualified`, but no file or folder `Node/Name/FullyQualified` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/component/Name_resolution.markdown:31
  • doc/component/Walking_the_AST.markdown names `Node\Stmt\Else_`, but no file or folder `Node/Stmt/Else_` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — doc/component/Walking_the_AST.markdown:189

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\Variable`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/Variable` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\FuncCall`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/FuncCall` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\String_`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/String_` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\LNumber`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/LNumber` exists; doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\MagicConst\File`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/MagicConst/File` exists.
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 · Observability0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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.

  • No logging or diagnostics emission found. This repository ships a binary its users launch rather than a service you operate, so there is no operator to page — but when a run fails on a user's machine, neither they nor you have anything to read.

What to do

  • Write a diagnostic trail the user can hand back with a bug report: a log file under the platform's per-user data directory, switchable with a `--verbose`/`--debug` flag. Start with the error paths that emit nothing — a discarded error is the failure the user cannot describe and you cannot reproduce.
P3 · Security & performance tooling4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

X19 · Unrestored process-global state3.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `tokenize` changes state that belongs to the whole PROCESS and changes it back at the end of the same body — the `xdebug.scream` ini setting (changed at line 29, put back at line 35) — which says the change was meant to last no longer than this call. But the restore is an ordinary statement on the straight-line path, not a `finally`, so it is skipped by any exception thrown in between: PHP then keeps the overwritten value for the rest of the request — and in a CLI command, a queue worker or a long-running server (Octane, Swoole, RoadRunner, FrankenPHP) for the rest of the process's life — and every later relative path, child-process launch, date, number format, XML parse or error report in ANY class reads it. That failure is silent and remote from its cause: the function that breaks is not the function that moved the value. The durable fix is not to widen the restore but to stop mutating the global: pass the value to the operation that needs it — `cwd` and `env` to Symfony `Process` (`new Process($command, $cwd, $env)`) or `proc_open($command, $spec, $pipes, $cwd, $env)`, absolute paths instead of `chdir`, an explicit `DateTimeZone` or locale to `DateTimeImmutable`/`IntlDateFormatter`/`NumberFormatter`, an explicit encoding to the `mb_*` call, `LIBXML_NOERROR`/`libxml_get_errors` handling in one place. Where the global genuinely must move, wrap it `try`/`finally` so the restore runs on every path. — lib/PhpParser/Lexer.php:24

What to do

  • Each finding names the statement that changes the process-global value and the statement that puts it back. Confirm from the two that nothing between them is protected — then prefer removing the mutation over widening the restore: a `cwd` and `env` passed to Symfony `Process` or `proc_open`, an absolute path, or an explicit `DateTimeZone`/locale/encoding argument is scoped to that operation, which is what the save-and-restore was trying to approximate. Where the global genuinely must move (an error handler around a call that warns), a `try`/`finally` is the least that makes the restore unconditional.
X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

X3 · Exception handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

X5 · Nullable reference types2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether PHP's static analysis checks null and is not undermined by a nullness baseline — PHPStan from level 8 (`checkNullables`) or Psalm at `errorLevel` 3 or stricter is what makes `?User` a type whose method call is an error, and the null entries of a baseline, `@psalm-suppress PossiblyNull…` and `@phpstan-ignore *.nonObject` are what silence it.

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

  • 0/1 of this repository's PHPStan/Psalm configuration(s) run at a level that checks null — PHPStan level 8 or above (`max` included), or Psalm `errorLevel` 3 or below (Psalm's default, with none stated, is 1). A PHPStan level written neither in the file nor in an include inside the repository is 0, PHPStan's own default. Below those levels the checker removes `null` from a union before any rule looks, so `$order->customer()->name()` on a `?Customer` passes, and the first null reaching it is an `Error: Call to a member function name() on null` in production.

What to do

  • Raise PHPStan to level 8 (`level: 8` in `phpstan.neon.dist`, or `max`) or Psalm to `errorLevel="3"` or stricter, so `?Type` is a type the checker holds you to; generate a baseline for what that surfaces only to pay it down, not to keep it. Then resolve the baselined nullness errors rather than adding to them: each is a call on a value the checker showed could be null — narrow it (`if ($x === null) { … }`, `?->`, an early return), make the property non-nullable and initialise it in the constructor, or change the return type so the null cannot arrive.

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 Health65%Adequate — gated by X5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture88%Adequate — gated by D26Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity49%Weak — gated by M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness58%Adequate — gated by P2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security92%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Unscored — 2 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — 1 observation(s) recorded · The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release). Build integrity and workflow-token hygiene are reported below: they describe what the CI runs and the token it runs with, neither of which is affected by whether the pipeline ships an artifact.
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — 1 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
Not evidenced — 2 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.

  • P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 70 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 applicable: this repository's PHP imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: PHP builds its object graph per request and shares none of it between requests.
  • AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Laravel migration, an Eloquent $fillable/$hidden list or a Doctrine #[ORM\Column] property — and no database client (PDO, mysqli, Laravel's DB facade, $wpdb) in the source either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect.
  • C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — this repository registers no route (no Laravel Route::…, no Symfony #[Route], no Filament panel, no WordPress REST route or AJAX action). Access control is therefore N/A here — a Composer library is authorized by the application that mounts it, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
  • C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone_number, …) or stored credential in a Laravel migration, an Eloquent model's $fillable/$hidden list or a Doctrine #[ORM\Column] property — and no database client (PDO, mysqli, Laravel's DB facade, $wpdb) in the source either, so this repository keeps no sensitive data whose changes an audit trail would record. If it does (through a hosted backend configured outside this repository, for instance), the trail belongs to wherever that data is stored.
  • C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Laravel migration, an Eloquent $fillable/$hidden list or a Doctrine #[ORM\Column] property — and no database client (PDO, mysqli, Laravel's DB facade, $wpdb) in the source either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Laravel migration, an Eloquent $fillable/$hidden list or a Doctrine #[ORM\Column] property — and no database client (PDO, mysqli, Laravel's DB facade, $wpdb) in the source either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no .php test runner
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency hygiene not measured — dependency manifest found but not parsed for hygiene
  • D14 License Compliance — Composer package licences not graded — this repository commits no composer.lock and this pass does not run Composer's solver
  • 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, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
  • 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.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
  • D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this Composer build ships 1 production module(s), so there is no coupling BETWEEN modules to measure. (Its test and non-production modules are not part of the shipped graph.)
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • 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#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — 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
  • 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 (Clover XML — with Xdebug (`XDEBUG_MODE=coverage`) or PCOV installed, `vendor/bin/phpunit --coverage-clover coverage.xml`) 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 PHPBench subjects (`bench*` methods, or `@Subject`/`#[Subject]` ones) in a file importing PhpBench or carrying its annotations, `bench*` methods in a `*Bench.php` file where PHPBench is installed, or phpbench/phpbench in a composer.json or a phpbench.json, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: PHP runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
  • PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: PHP has no async/await function colour, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
  • 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
  • X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X12 Unreachable branch — 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
  • X13 Undrained process stream — 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
  • X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — 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
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's PHP was read and makes no request a caller can cancel (amphp's HttpClient or connect) — synchronous PHP offers its callers no cancellation to take
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — 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
  • X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — Not applicable: this check looks for a collection written by a callback on one thread while the body waiting on it touches it on another, and in this repository's languages no collection is reachable from two threads at once. PHP gives a request one thread of its own; the event-loop libraries (ReactPHP, Amp) run callbacks one at a time, and ext-parallel copies every value across its channels, so no array or collection is reachable from two threads at once. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • 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 — 13 finding(s)
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
Serious — 91 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×13
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:581 — // TODO Add <?php properly — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:814 — // TODO: Try to preserve formatting — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:865 — // TODO: Preserve formatting. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:975 — // TODO: Preserve formatting. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:998 — // TODO: Support removing single node. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1491 — // TODO: "yield" where both key and value are inserted doesn't work — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1520 — //'Stmt_TraitUseAdaptation_Alias->newName' => [T_AS, false, ' ', null], // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1538 — //'Expr_ShellExec->parts' => '', // TODO These need to be treated more carefully — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1641 — // TODO Insertion into empty statement lists. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1719 — //Stmt\TraitUseAdaptation\Alias::class . '->newModifier' => 0, // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/Comment.php:200 — // TODO: Rename these to include "start". — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenStream.php:233 — // TODO Handle non-space indentation — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AttributeEmulator.php:35 — // TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×5
  • MethodTooLong: Php8.initReduceCallbacks lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php:1276 — MethodTooLong — initReduceCallbacks runs 1107 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 1007 over it, 11.07× 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: Php7.initReduceCallbacks lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php:1259 — MethodTooLong — initReduceCallbacks runs 1101 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 1001 over it, 11.01× 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: PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:785 — MethodTooLong — pArray runs 155 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 55 over it, 1.55× 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: NameResolver.enterNode lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php:55 — MethodTooLong — enterNode runs 130 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 30 over it, 1.30× 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: ParserAbstract.doParse lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:229 — MethodTooLong — doParse runs 109 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 9 over it, 1.09× 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.
D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×5
  • ClassTooLong: Php8 lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php:19 — ClassTooLong — 1674 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 1 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 1274 over it, 4.19× 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: Php7 lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php:19 — ClassTooLong — 1639 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 1 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 1239 over it, 4.10× 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: PrettyPrinterAbstract lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:22 — ClassTooLong — 932 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 39 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 532 over it, 2.33× 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: Standard lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard.php:16 — ClassTooLong — 703 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 189 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 303 over it, 1.76× 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: ParserAbstract lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:39 — ClassTooLong — 665 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 57 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 265 over it, 1.66× 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.
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×5
  • FileTooLong: Parser/Php8.php lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php — FileTooLong — 1683 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 99% of them inside a single declaration: Php8 (19-2953). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1183 over it, 3.37× 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: Parser/Php7.php lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php — FileTooLong — 1648 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 99% of them inside a single declaration: Php7 (19-2927). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1148 over it, 3.30× 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: PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php — FileTooLong — 950 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 98% of them inside a single declaration: PrettyPrinterAbstract (22-1728). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 450 over it, 1.90× 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: PrettyPrinter/Standard.php lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard.php — FileTooLong — 715 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 98% of them inside a single declaration: Standard (16-1236). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 215 over it, 1.43× 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: PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php — FileTooLong — 695 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 96% of them inside a single declaration: ParserAbstract (39-1342). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 195 over it, 1.39× 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.
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×3
  • TooManyMethods: Standard lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard.php:16 — TooManyMethods — 189 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 159 over it, 6.30× 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: ParserAbstract lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:39 — TooManyMethods — 57 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 27 over it, 1.90× 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: PrettyPrinterAbstract lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:22 — TooManyMethods — 39 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 9 over it, 1.30× 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 (6 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AttributeEmulator.php:21 — lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AttributeEmulator.php:21-26 | lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/PipeOperatorEmulator.php:20-25 — 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 `lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AttributeEmulator.php:21` 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 (6 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/VoidCastEmulator.php:26 — lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/VoidCastEmulator.php:26-31 | lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/VoidCastEmulator.php:39-44 — 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 (6 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AsymmetricVisibilityTokenEmulator.php:73 — lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/AsymmetricVisibilityTokenEmulator.php:73-78 | lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/KeywordEmulator.php:17-22 — 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. 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.
D10 · Test Quality · No assertions · ×2
  • No assertions: testPrettyPrint test/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterTest.php:40 — 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: testPrettyPrintFile test/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterTest.php:47 — 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.
D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×2
  • Change coupling: Php7.php ↔ Php8.php lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php:1 — `lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php` and `lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php` change together 88% of the time (43 of the 49 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 43 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `23c8e363` Implement support for partial function application; `f01ac402` Emit error for unparenthesized arrow function in pipe operator; `02dcdd74` Avoid deprecated SplObjectStorage::attach/detach — run `git show` on any of them.
  • Change coupling: DNumber.php ↔ LNumber.php lib/PhpParser/Node/Scalar/DNumber.php:1 — `lib/PhpParser/Node/Scalar/DNumber.php` and `lib/PhpParser/Node/Scalar/LNumber.php` 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). 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 5 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `33745027` Use @deprecated above class to allow static analyzer like PHPStan det…; `469377f4` Fix classmap authoritative autoloading (#1046); `3f718ee2` [PHP 7.4] Add support for numeric literal separators (#615) — run `git show` on any of them.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Node/Stmt/Goto_.php:19 — lib/PhpParser/Node/Stmt/Goto_.php:19-28 | lib/PhpParser/Node/Stmt/Label.php:19-28 — 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 `lib/PhpParser/Node/Stmt/Goto_.php:19` 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.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Error.php:149 — lib/PhpParser/Error.php:149-158 | lib/PhpParser/NodeDumper.php:288-297 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cyclomatic 60) · ×1
  • PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cyclomatic 60) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:785 — PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray has cyclomatic complexity 60 (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. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php holds 3 of the 11 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 74 of the 192 points over it (39%), 2.1× the next-largest file (lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php at 36). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · NameResolver.enterNode (cyclomatic 51) · ×1
  • NameResolver.enterNode (cyclomatic 51) lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php:55 — NameResolver.enterNode has cyclomatic complexity 51 (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 · ParserAbstract.doParse (cyclomatic 43) · ×1
  • ParserAbstract.doParse (cyclomatic 43) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:229 — ParserAbstract.doParse has cyclomatic complexity 43 (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 · NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cyclomatic 37) · ×1
  • NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cyclomatic 37) lib/PhpParser/NodeDumper.php:69 — NodeDumper.dumpRecursive has cyclomatic complexity 37 (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 · PrettyPrinterAbstract.p (cyclomatic 32) · ×1
  • PrettyPrinterAbstract.p (cyclomatic 32) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:604 — PrettyPrinterAbstract.p has cyclomatic complexity 32 (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. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php holds 3 of the 11 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 74 of the 192 points over it (39%), 2.1× the next-largest file (lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php at 36). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · PrettyPrinterAbstract.pFixup (cyclomatic 27) · ×1
  • PrettyPrinterAbstract.pFixup (cyclomatic 27) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1063 — PrettyPrinterAbstract.pFixup has cyclomatic complexity 27 (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. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php holds 3 of the 11 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 74 of the 192 points over it (39%), 2.1× the next-largest file (lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php at 36). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · NodeTraverser.traverseArray (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • NodeTraverser.traverseArray (cyclomatic 24) lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:181 — NodeTraverser.traverseArray 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 · Php7.initReduceCallbacks (cyclomatic 22) · ×1
  • Php7.initReduceCallbacks (cyclomatic 22) lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php:1259 — Php7.initReduceCallbacks has cyclomatic complexity 22 (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 · Php8.initReduceCallbacks (cyclomatic 22) · ×1
  • Php8.initReduceCallbacks (cyclomatic 22) lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php:1276 — Php8.initReduceCallbacks has cyclomatic complexity 22 (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 · NodeTraverser.traverseNode (cyclomatic 20) · ×1
  • NodeTraverser.traverseNode (cyclomatic 20) lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:93 — NodeTraverser.traverseNode 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 · TokenPolyfill.tokenize (cyclomatic 19) · ×1
  • TokenPolyfill.tokenize (cyclomatic 19) lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenPolyfill.php:124 — TokenPolyfill.tokenize 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.
D17 · Explicit Debt · FixmeComment · ×1
  • FixmeComment lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:62 — // FIXME: This precedence is incorrect for PHP 8. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cognitive 142) · ×1
  • PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray (cognitive 142) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:785 — PrettyPrinterAbstract.pArray has cognitive complexity 142 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 43 (113 pts), boolean chains 17, loops 3 (7 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 77). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ParserAbstract.doParse (cognitive 104) · ×1
  • ParserAbstract.doParse (cognitive 104) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:229 — ParserAbstract.doParse has cognitive complexity 104 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (68 pts), boolean chains 16, loops 4 (12 pts), error handling 1 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 61). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cognitive 78) · ×1
  • NodeDumper.dumpRecursive (cognitive 78) lib/PhpParser/NodeDumper.php:69 — NodeDumper.dumpRecursive has cognitive complexity 78 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (62 pts), boolean chains 9, loops 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 48). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PrettyPrinterAbstract.p (cognitive 63) · ×1
  • PrettyPrinterAbstract.p (cognitive 63) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:604 — PrettyPrinterAbstract.p has cognitive complexity 63 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23 (52 pts), boolean chains 10, loops 1 (nesting depth added 29). 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 · TokenPolyfill.tokenize (cognitive 59) · ×1
  • TokenPolyfill.tokenize (cognitive 59) lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenPolyfill.php:124 — TokenPolyfill.tokenize has cognitive complexity 59 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (50 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 37). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · NameResolver.enterNode (cognitive 50) · ×1
  • NameResolver.enterNode (cognitive 50) lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver.php:55 — NameResolver.enterNode has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 11 (24 pts), if/else 9 (19 pts), boolean chains 6, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 23). 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 · NodeTraverser.traverseArray (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • NodeTraverser.traverseArray (cognitive 34) lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:181 — NodeTraverser.traverseArray has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (27 pts), loops 4 (7 pts) (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 · NodeTraverser.traverseNode (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • NodeTraverser.traverseNode (cognitive 33) lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:93 — NodeTraverser.traverseNode has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (28 pts), loops 3 (5 pts) (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 · Php7.initReduceCallbacks (cognitive 31) · ×1
  • Php7.initReduceCallbacks (cognitive 31) lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php7.php:1259 — Php7.initReduceCallbacks has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (27 pts), loops 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 5). 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 · Php8.initReduceCallbacks (cognitive 31) · ×1
  • Php8.initReduceCallbacks (cognitive 31) lib/PhpParser/Parser/Php8.php:1276 — Php8.initReduceCallbacks has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (27 pts), loops 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 5). 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 · ParserAbstract.handleNamespaces (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • ParserAbstract.handleNamespaces (cognitive 28) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:568 — ParserAbstract.handleNamespaces has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (21 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (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 · PrettyPrinterAbstract.pFixup (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • PrettyPrinterAbstract.pFixup (cognitive 28) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinterAbstract.php:1063 — PrettyPrinterAbstract.pFixup has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), boolean chains 6, ternaries 1 (3 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 11). 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 · Standard.pScalar_String (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • Standard.pScalar_String (cognitive 26) lib/PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard.php:143 — Standard.pScalar_String has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (13 pts), ternaries 3 (10 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 15). 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 · ParserAbstract.parseDocString (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • ParserAbstract.parseDocString (cognitive 25) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:843 — ParserAbstract.parseDocString has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (20 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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 · NameContext.getPossibleNames (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • NameContext.getPossibleNames (cognitive 21) lib/PhpParser/NameContext.php:156 — NameContext.getPossibleNames has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 2 (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 · ParserAbstract.getNamespacingStyle (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • ParserAbstract.getNamespacingStyle (cognitive 21) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:665 — ParserAbstract.getNamespacingStyle has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (13 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 1 (3 pts), 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 · CommentAnnotatingVisitor.enterNode (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • CommentAnnotatingVisitor.enterNode (cognitive 20) lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/CommentAnnotatingVisitor.php:36 — CommentAnnotatingVisitor.enterNode has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (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 · Differ.calculateTrace (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • Differ.calculateTrace (cognitive 18) lib/PhpParser/Internal/Differ.php:62 — Differ.calculateTrace has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (7 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 5 (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 · Differ.coalesceReplacements (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • Differ.coalesceReplacements (cognitive 18) lib/PhpParser/Internal/Differ.php:142 — Differ.coalesceReplacements has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 5 (11 pts), if/else 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Emulative.fixupTokens (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • Emulative.fixupTokens (cognitive 18) lib/PhpParser/Lexer/Emulative.php:131 — Emulative.fixupTokens has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (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 · VoidCastEmulator.emulate (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • VoidCastEmulator.emulate (cognitive 18) lib/PhpParser/Lexer/TokenEmulator/VoidCastEmulator.php:17 — VoidCastEmulator.emulate has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 1 (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 · ParserAbstract.getExpectedTokens (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • ParserAbstract.getExpectedTokens (cognitive 18) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:453 — ParserAbstract.getExpectedTokens has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (9 pts), boolean chains 8, loops 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 · BuilderHelpers.normalizeValue (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • BuilderHelpers.normalizeValue (cognitive 17) lib/PhpParser/BuilderHelpers.php:222 — BuilderHelpers.normalizeValue has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (12 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 4). 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 · TokenPolyfill.is (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • TokenPolyfill.is (cognitive 17) lib/PhpParser/Internal/TokenPolyfill.php:69 — TokenPolyfill.is has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), loops 1 (2 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.
D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming convention for factory methods creating builder types. Most methods use the singular noun of the type (e.g., `class`, `interface`, `method`, `param`), but these two use the plural or compound noun (`useTrait`, `traitUseAdaptation`). · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming convention for factory methods creating builder types. Most methods use the singular noun of the type (e.g., `class`, `interface`, `method`, `param`), but these two use the plural or compound noun (`useTrait`, `traitUseAdaptation`). — Rename `useTrait` to `traitUse` and `traitUseAdaptation` to `traitUseAdaptation` (or just `traitUseAdaptation` is fine, but `useTrait` breaks the pattern). Ideally, `useTrait` should be `traitUse` to match `traitUseAdaptation` and the general `Type` -> `type()` pattern. (signatures: BuilderFactory.useTrait(traits): TraitUse | BuilderFactory.traitUseAdaptation(trait, method): TraitUseAdaptation)
D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming for related operations. `use` is generic, while `useFunction` and `useConst` are specific. However, `useTrait` (from the previous inconsistency) is also a specific use case but named differently. More critically, `use` vs `useFunction`/`useConst` implies a hierarchy that isn't reflected in the base name `use` being ambiguous. · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for related operations. `use` is generic, while `useFunction` and `useConst` are specific. However, `useTrait` (from the previous inconsistency) is also a specific use case but named differently. More critically, `use` vs `useFunction`/`useConst` implies a hierarchy that isn't reflected in the base name `use` being ambiguous. — This is a minor stylistic issue, but `useTrait` being the outlier in the `use*` family is the stronger inconsistency. If `useTrait` is renamed to `traitUse`, the `use*` family becomes `use`, `useFunction`, `useConst`, `traitUse`. This is still slightly inconsistent. A better unification would be `useFunction`, `useConst`, `useTrait` (keeping the verb-noun structure) OR `functionUse`, `constUse`, `traitUse`. Given the existing `use` method, the current mix is acceptable but `useTrait` is the clear odd-one-out. (signatures: BuilderFactory.use(name): Use_ | BuilderFactory.useFunction(name): Use_ | BuilderFactory.useConst(name): Use_)
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:130 — lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:130-151 | lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:218-239 — 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 `lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:130` 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) lib/PhpParser/Builder/Class_.php:111 — lib/PhpParser/Builder/Class_.php:111-121 | lib/PhpParser/Builder/Enum_.php:77-87 | lib/PhpParser/Builder/Trait_.php:44-54 — 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 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `lib/PhpParser/Builder/Class_.php:111` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:119 — lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:119-127 | lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:207-215 — 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 `lib/PhpParser/NodeTraverser.php:119` 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NodeConnectingVisitor.php:42 — lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NodeConnectingVisitor.php:42-49 | lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/ParentConnectingVisitor.php:36-43 — 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.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/MethodCall.php:29 — lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/MethodCall.php:29-44 | lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/NullsafeMethodCall.php:29-44 — before extracting anything, compare `lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/MethodCall.php` and `lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/NullsafeMethodCall.php` as WHOLE FILES: 85% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/MethodCall.php:29` 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 (11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/NullsafePropertyFetch.php:23 — lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/NullsafePropertyFetch.php:23-33 | lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/PropertyFetch.php:23-33 — before extracting anything, compare `lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/NullsafePropertyFetch.php` and `lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/PropertyFetch.php` as WHOLE FILES: 88% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `lib/PhpParser/Node/Expr/NullsafePropertyFetch.php:23` 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 (5 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) lib/PhpParser/Node/Arg.php:30 — lib/PhpParser/Node/Arg.php:30-34 | lib/PhpParser/Node/ArrayItem.php:26-30 — 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.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×1
  • Low cohesion: ParserAbstract (LCOM4 10) lib/PhpParser/ParserAbstract.php:39 — ParserAbstract's methods fall into 10 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 10 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.
M1 · Documentation (README) · README may be stale · ×1
  • README may be stale — 21 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.
P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Coverage collected but not gated · ×1
  • Coverage collected but not gated — CI collects a coverage report but no step enforces a minimum — coverage could halve and CI stays green. Add a step that fails the build when coverage drops below a floor (your coverage tool's minimum-threshold flag, or a coverage-gate action) so the number guards something. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: this repository's CI files AND its coverage configuration — the well-known coverage and test-runner config files, read at the repository root and inside workspace package directories two levels down, so a floor declared beside the tests rather than in the pipeline is credited — matched against the threshold settings this check knows by name. A floor set in your coverage service's web UI rather than in a committed file, or under a setting whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
P2 · Observability · No structured logging · ×1
  • No structured logging — No logging or diagnostics emission found. This repository ships a binary its users launch rather than a service you operate, so there is no operator to page — but when a run fails on a user's machine, neither they nor you have anything to read.
X19 · Unrestored process-global state · Process-global state is restored only on the happy path · ×1
  • Process-global state is restored only on the happy path lib/PhpParser/Lexer.php:24 — `tokenize` changes state that belongs to the whole PROCESS and changes it back at the end of the same body — the `xdebug.scream` ini setting (changed at line 29, put back at line 35) — which says the change was meant to last no longer than this call. But the restore is an ordinary statement on the straight-line path, not a `finally`, so it is skipped by any exception thrown in between: PHP then keeps the overwritten value for the rest of the request — and in a CLI command, a queue worker or a long-running server (Octane, Swoole, RoadRunner, FrankenPHP) for the rest of the process's life — and every later relative path, child-process launch, date, number format, XML parse or error report in ANY class reads it. That failure is silent and remote from its cause: the function that breaks is not the function that moved the value. The durable fix is not to widen the restore but to stop mutating the global: pass the value to the operation that needs it — `cwd` and `env` to Symfony `Process` (`new Process($command, $cwd, $env)`) or `proc_open($command, $spec, $pipes, $cwd, $env)`, absolute paths instead of `chdir`, an explicit `DateTimeZone` or locale to `DateTimeImmutable`/`IntlDateFormatter`/`NumberFormatter`, an explicit encoding to the `mb_*` call, `LIBXML_NOERROR`/`libxml_get_errors` handling in one place. Where the global genuinely must move, wrap it `try`/`finally` so the restore runs on every path.
Minor — 26 finding(s)
M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×13
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:185 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\Variable`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/Variable` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:185 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Expr\FuncCall`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Expr/FuncCall` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:187 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\String_`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/String_` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:187 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\LNumber`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/LNumber` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:188 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Scalar\MagicConst\File`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Scalar/MagicConst/File` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:191 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\Node\Arg`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Node/Arg` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:193 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `Node\Stmt\Expression`, but no file or folder `Node/Stmt/Expression` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:221 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\PrettyPrinter\Standard`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/PrettyPrinter/Standard` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:373 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown names `PhpParser\NodeVisitor\NameResolver`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/NodeVisitor/NameResolver` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown:399 — doc/2_Usage_of_basic_components.markdown documents the environment variable `A_B`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/component/Lexer.markdown:30 — doc/component/Lexer.markdown names `PhpParser\Lexer\Emulative`, but no file or folder `PhpParser/Lexer/Emulative` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/component/Name_resolution.markdown:31 — doc/component/Name_resolution.markdown names `Node\Name\FullyQualified`, but no file or folder `Node/Name/FullyQualified` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift doc/component/Walking_the_AST.markdown:189 — doc/component/Walking_the_AST.markdown names `Node\Stmt\Else_`, but no file or folder `Node/Stmt/Else_` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned file · ×4
  • Orphaned file grammar/phpyLang.php:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file lib/PhpParser/Builder/TraitUseAdaptation.php:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file lib/PhpParser/Builder/ClassConst.php:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file lib/PhpParser/Builder/Enum_.php:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1
  • Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 2 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: test_old/run.php, lib/PhpParser/PhpVersion.php. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
D16 · Bus Factor · Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1
  • Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 2 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (5 single-owned of 56 analysed files in total, 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; 56 of the 278 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (2 file(s)), anonymized user #3 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above. The files folded here: lib/PhpParser/Lexer.php, lib/PhpParser/NodeVisitor/CommentAnnotatingVisitor.php, bin/php-parse.
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 · Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
  • Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 2 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (22073 LoC, 263 module-visible types across 22 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
  • Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 4 of 56 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; 56 of the 278 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: grammar/phpyLang.php, lib/PhpParser/Builder/TraitUseAdaptation.php, lib/PhpParser/Builder/ClassConst.php, lib/PhpParser/Builder/Enum_.php. 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
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.
M2 · Architecture documentation · No architecture diagram/doc · ×1
  • No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
X5 · Nullable reference types · PHP static analysis does not check null everywhere · ×1
  • PHP static analysis does not check null everywhere — 0/1 of this repository's PHPStan/Psalm configuration(s) run at a level that checks null — PHPStan level 8 or above (`max` included), or Psalm `errorLevel` 3 or below (Psalm's default, with none stated, is 1). A PHPStan level written neither in the file nor in an include inside the repository is 0, PHPStan's own default. Below those levels the checker removes `null` from a union before any rule looks, so `$order->customer()->name()` on a `?Customer` passes, and the first null reaching it is an `Error: Call to a member function name() on null` in production.
Minor — 2 finding(s)
D10 · Test Quality · Skipped (documented) · ×2
  • Skipped (documented): testNormalizeValueEnum test/PhpParser/BuilderHelpersTest.php:227 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
  • Skipped (documented): testError test/PhpParser/LexerTest.php:16 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()

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-1bd3189f7eed4cee9d0e14d376ee9b2e/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-1bd3189f7eed4cee9d0e14d376ee9b2e/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .13artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesnone (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)—none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).0—
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: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.0—
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 Dependenciesnone (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)—none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).0—

Run 01a16ffd-46e9-7e85-8b7b-416c205b35ea · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Issues: 13 · Warnings: 91 · Recommendations: 26 · Info: 2 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 24-10-2026 @ 22:17 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