patchlevel/event-sourcing

Executive summary

patchlevel/event-sourcing scores 67 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while four of its six lenses score higher still: Performance at 100, rated Exemplary, Code Health at 87, rated Strong, and Architecture at 85 and Security and Compliance at 70, both rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those four because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 60 and is rated Adequate. Its Architecture documentation dimension scores 3 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor and to resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 67 to about 71.

83 findings are critical: 75 in Static Analysis (SAST), four in IaC & Container Security, two in Change Coupling, one in Dependency Vulnerabilities and one in Secrets (history).

Watchdog couldn't measure 17 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Navigability, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 14,207 lines, which would take an estimated 0.4 person-years, around €54,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 87 Strong Architecture 85 Adequate, capped by Project Cohesion Maturity 60 Adequate, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 66 Adequate Security and Compliance 70 Adequate, capped by Static Analysis (SAST) and Supply-chain Provenance & Signing Performance 100 ★ Exemplary

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

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

Maturity 60 · counts for 46%Production Readiness 66 · counts for 25%Security and Compliance 70 · counts for 14%Architecture 85 · counts for 8%Code Health 87 · counts for 4%Performance 100 · counts for 2%

If Maturity rose from 60 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 67 to about 71.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Product code 32%Tests 68%

New since the last survey: 11 findings

These 11 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 8 October 2026.

Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED

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: 2 findings

These 2 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 8 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED

Rebuild cost: about €54,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€18,000 to €90,000, for 300 to 952 hours of work, about 0.4 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem	Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor	×0.9 at a score of 67. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size	Small: 14,207 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.

Resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor.

Raises the score by about 2 points · Low effort · Bus Factor

Resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor.

Raises the score by about 2 points · Low effort · Bus Factor

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 5 points · Medium effort · Architecture documentation

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 €54,000 to build again, about 0.4 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 60 (Adequate). 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 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 2 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Bus Factor 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.

41 modules, with 71 dependencies between them. 3 loops run through 6 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 1 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	2 Metadata	4 Schema	7 Store.Criteria	9 Subscription	12 Message.Translator	13 Metadata.AggregateRoot	14 Metadata.Event	15 Metadata.Message	16 Metadata.Subscriber	17 Snapshot.Adapter	18 Subscription.Cleanup	19 Subscription.RetryStrategy	20 Subscription.Store	21 Aggregate	22 Message	23 Serializer	25 Subscription.Subscriber	28 Serializer.Encoder	29 Snapshot	30 Message.Serializer	31 Console	32 Store	33 Repository	34 Subscription.Engine	35 Subscription.Lookup
1 Clock
2 Metadata
3 QueryBus
4 Schema
5 Serializer.Normalizer
6 Serializer.Upcast
7 Store.Criteria
8 Store.Header
9 Subscription
10 Attribute				3
11 Cryptography		2
12 Message.Translator															12
13 Metadata.AggregateRoot	15
14 Metadata.Event	7
15 Metadata.Message	3
16 Metadata.Subscriber	8			1
17 Snapshot.Adapter																			1
18 Subscription.Cleanup				2
19 Subscription.RetryStrategy				4
20 Subscription.Store		1		3
21 Aggregate						5
22 Message					1
23 Serializer							1											1
24 Subscription.Cleanup.Dbal											1
25 Subscription.Subscriber				2					6
26 EventBus															5
27 Repository.MessageDecorator							1								3
28 Serializer.Encoder																2
29 Snapshot						1				3				5
30 Message.Serializer								1										1
31 Console															1	1				1
32 Store		2	2												6	4				4
33 Repository						3								11								3
34 Subscription.Engine				4			1					2	3		2		3					8
35 Subscription.Lookup			1												1							2
36 CommandBus						2																	2
37 CommandBus.Handler														1									2
38 Console.Command		3		1		3	1									3				3	4	5		4
39 Subscription.Repository														2									3	2
40 Subscription.Subscriber.ArgumentResolver									6					1	6							1			1

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 87% · Strong ·

The Good

D1 · PHP Cyclomatic Complexity 8.8 D2 · PHP Cognitive Complexity 7.5 D3 · PHP God Classes 9.4 D4 · PHP Code Duplication 9.1 D17 · PHP Explicit Debt 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 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 7.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 10.0 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 9.8

At a glance — Architecture · 85% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

The Good

D6 · PHP Cohesion (LCOM4) 9.7 D35 · PHP Change Coupling 9.9 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.3 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0

The Ugly

D22 · PHP Internal API Consistency 4.0 D26 · PHP Project Cohesion 0.0

At a glance — Maturity · 60% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good

D15 · PHP Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D16 · PHP Bus Factor 7.9 D19 · PHP Documentation Quality 9.0 D21 · PHP Naming Consistency 10.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 8.0

The Bad

M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 5.2

The Ugly

M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 3.0

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Adequate ·

The Good

D9 · PHP Test Distribution 8.5 D10 · PHP Test Quality 10.0 D12 · PHP Dependency Hygiene 9.7 D13 · PHP REDACTED Scanning 10.0 D14 · PHP License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 8.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 7.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 7.0

The Bad

P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 5.0

At a glance — Security · 70% · Adequate · gated by D29, D36 ·

The Good

D28 · PHP Secrets (history) 9.0 D30 · PHP Dependency Vulnerabilities 9.4 D31 · PHP IaC & Container Security 8.2 D43 · PHP Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · PHP Platform End-of-Life 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0

The Ugly

D29 · PHP Static Analysis (SAST) 0.1 D36 · PHP Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A05:2025 — Injection	79	High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	15	High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration	9	High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures	2	High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by documenting significant design decisions in the docs/adr folder and adding a Testing section to the README to clarify how to run the test suite. Next, address the bus factor risks by resolving sole-ownership and off-boarding concerns to ensure knowledge distribution. Finally, fix the 26 static analysis findings related to unpinned actions, prioritizing the REDACTED and REDACTED files.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor.	+2.4 pts	Low	Bus Factor
Resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor.	+2.4 pts	Low	Bus Factor
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.	+4.8 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
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.	+3.8 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)
Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution.	+1.5 pts	Low	Test Distribution
Resolve the 8 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED.	+0.9 pts	Low	Supply-chain Provenance & Signing
Resolve the 26 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (20), REDACTED (6).	+1.7 pts	Medium	Static Analysis (SAST)
Reconcile the README with reality: docs/getting-started.md links to `/docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation`, but `docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation` does not exist.	+1.5 pts	Medium	Documentation accuracy

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 35 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 34% slop · 35% mixed · 31% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.5	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.3	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.6	Slop	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	2.3	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	2.3	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	2.7	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
src/Repository/DefaultRepository.php	5.8	Mixed	Change Coupling: Boundary-crossing change coupling: DefaultRepository.php ↔ DefaultSnapshotStore.php
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED	6.3	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: Medium IaC: REDACTED
tests/Unit/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngineTest.php	6.9	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cyclomatic 19)
src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php	7.0	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (50 lines × 2)
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php	7.4	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (41 lines × 2)

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 — 83

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 — 83

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 — 34

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

Could not be resolved — 18

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. 48 of 53 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 53 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D6D9D10D12D13D14D15D16D17D19D21D22D26D28D29D30D31D35D36D43D44AX10AX3AX4M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6PF1X14X15X16X18X19X21X22X23X25X28X3X30X4X5

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

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 174 of 200 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a1656c-24a9-724a-b40f-89a925f84ba9.

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 --testsuite=unit --coverage-clover=clover.xml --cove…`) 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.
D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `src/Aggregate/AggregateHeader.php`, `src/Aggregate/AggregateRootAttributeBehaviour.php`, `src/Aggregate/CustomIdBehaviour.php`, `src/Aggregate/RamseyUuidV7Behaviour.php`, `src/Attribute/Aggregate.php`, … (+150 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
D34 Knowledge Freshness — 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. File-level freshness contradicts repo activity: 50 commits in the last 90 days, yet 27 of 46 significant files carry no living knowledge. Those two readings cannot both be true, so the per-file recency signal is treated as unreliable here and freshness is not scored for this run.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection registrations in C# and Spring beans in Java/Kotlin only, and this repository's container is a PSR-11 container (Psr\Container), whose lifetimes are not modelled 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.
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.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — mysql Pulling mariadb Pulling postgres Pulling mariadb Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden postgres Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mysql Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: postgres Pulling mysql Pulling mariadb Pulling mysql Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mariadb Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden postgres Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped.
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.
P8 Schema migrations — 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. The schema may be created by a runner, a deploy script or a config file outside what this check reads, so an absence here is our blind spot rather than a missing migration strategy. The card abstains instead of scoring. You can widen what we reach: if the schema is created and evolved by a tool this check does not name, naming it lets us teach the detector to read it.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check 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.

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.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (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.
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.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

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

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity8.8 / 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 8.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was InMemoryStore.filter at 33.

InMemoryStore.filter (cyclomatic 33)src/Store/InMemoryStore.php:173

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cyclomatic 19)src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:170

AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cyclomatic 18)src/Metadata/Subscriber/AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.php:28

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run (cyclomatic 17)src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:359

What to do

Bring the 4 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with InMemoryStore.filter (cyclomatic 33), DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cyclomatic 19), AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cyclomatic 18). — 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 Cyclomatic Complexity from 8.9 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

10 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was InMemoryStore.filter at 78.

InMemoryStore.filter (cognitive 78)src/Store/InMemoryStore.php:173

AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cognitive 34)src/Metadata/Subscriber/AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.php:28

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cognitive 32)src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:170

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.setup (cognitive 29)src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:71

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run (cognitive 29)src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:359

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

What to do

Bring the 3 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with InMemoryStore.filter (cognitive 78), AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cognitive 34), DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cognitive 32). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 3 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 7.5 to about 8.5/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes9.4 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

4 god class(es) detected.

ClassTooLong: DefaultSubscriptionEnginesrc/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:32

FileTooLong: Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.phpsrc/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php

TooManyMethods: Subscriptionsrc/Subscription/Subscription.php:10

MethodTooLong: DefaultSubscriptionEngine.bootsrc/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:170

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.1 / 10Stronggated by 30 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

30 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×6src/CommandBus/HandlerFinder.php:61

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×3src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:412

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×3src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:365

Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×2src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:261

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:33

+ 13 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 6 Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with DoctrineDbalStore.php (3), HandlerFinder.php, DoctrineCipherKeyStore.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with DoctrineDbalStore.php, DoctrineDbalStoreStream.php, DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with DoctrineDbalStore.php, Psr16AggregateRootRegistryFactory.php, Psr16EventMetadataFactory.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.7 / 10Stronggated by 2 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

2 of 72 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: Lookup (LCOM4 9) · ×2src/Subscription/Lookup/Lookup.php:25

What to do

Resolve the 2 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with Lookup.php, Message.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution8.5 / 10Strong✓ 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 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

961 test methods: 0 unit, 961 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

Inverted test pyramid

What to do

Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

7 skipped (7 with a documented reason), 4 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 961 tests.

Skipped (documented): testSaveLockTimeout · ×7tests/Integration/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:204

No assertions (declared): testInstantiate · ×4tests/Unit/Attribute/IdTest.php:16

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D12 · Dependency Hygiene9.7 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

7 outdated, 0 abandoned direct Composer dependencies. PLATFORM requirements (php, ext-*, lib-*) are deliberately not graded here: they name the runtime rather than a Packagist package, so there is no release for them to be behind — whether that runtime is still supported is a separate question with a separate remedy. Development requirements are excluded, because a consumer never installs them. A newer release is reported only where this repository's OWN constraint already admits it, so the remedy is `composer update` and never a manifest edit. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question.

Outdated: doctrine/dbal · ×7

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · REDACTED 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

REDACTED scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 of 29 locked Composer package(s) use a banned license. Licences were read from this repository's REDACTED, which records the `license` each package declares, over every package in its production `packages` list, direct and transitive, at the locked version; the 81 package(s) under `packages-dev` are not installed for a consumer and are excluded.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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. Repeated repair below the complexity floor: src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php (3 of 3 changes were fixes)

Repeated repair: src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.phpsrc/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:162

What to do

Resolve the 1 Repeated repair finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D16 · Bus Factor7.9 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

10 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php. Counted over 46 of the 373 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)

What to do

Resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt10.0 / 10Stronggated by 3 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

3 deducted task-comment markers across 14207 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×3tests/Unit/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngineTest.php:943

What to do

Resolve the 3 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with DefaultSubscriptionEngineTest.php (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository's root README and a dedicated docs directory provide clear documentation for an event-sourcing library: the README states what it is (an event-sourcing library) and gives an overview of features, while the docs directory contains a detailed upgrade guide, aggregate ID reference, CLI commands, clocking options, command bus, event-bus usage, and events with aliasing. The architecture/design documentation is also present but not shown in this summary. The repository's documentation is comprehensive and well-structured: the single README (docs/getting-started.md) gives a clear overview of what the project does (event-sourcing library with Doctrine integration), features, installation, and an event-driven example. The architecture/Docs directory contains 25 markdown files covering topics such as introduction, message decorators, metadata caching, normalizers, backward compatibility promises, personal-data encryption, and a query bus, reflecting the documented scope of the project. All visible documents are present in the outline; none is missing. The repository's README is well written and explains what the project does (storing/loading aggregates, building messages from events, optionally dispatching to an event bus) plus a concrete DefaultRepositoryManager example. The architecture/Docs set of markdown files covers each topic in depth: snapshots with configuration, split stream with usage, store with doctrine dbal/store options, subscriptions with subscriber/projector/run-mode attributes, and supported-versions, testing, and the PHPUnit test library. All visible documents are complete per their outlines.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyWeak◐ 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 Weak / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

5 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 374 exposed types.

Duplicate type definitions for descriptor objects with identical signatures in different namespaces. `CommandBus.HandlerDescriptor` and `EventBus.ListenerDescriptor` are structurally identical (name + callable), suggesting a shared base interface or class should be used instead of duplicating the definition.

Inconsistent property naming for the same concept. `CommandBus.HandlerReference` uses `commandClass` while `QueryBus.HandlerReference` uses `queryClass`. Since both represent the target class for a handler, the property name should be consistent (e.g., `targetClass` or `eventClass`/`commandClass` depending on context, but the pattern should be uniform).

Inconsistent method naming for parallel interfaces. `CommandBus.HandlerProvider` uses `handlerForCommand` while `QueryBus.HandlerProvider` uses `handlerForQuery`. While the domain differs, the interface pattern should ideally be consistent (e.g., `handlerFor` with a generic type or consistent naming convention).

Inconsistent factory method naming. `create` is used for the basic case, while `createWithHeaders` is used for the extended case. Standard PHP/PSR conventions often prefer `from*` or distinct static factories, or at least consistent suffixes. `createWithHeaders` is verbose compared to a potential `withHeaders` instance method (which exists) or a static `fromHeaders`.

Ambiguous intent between `createFromEvents` and `catchUp`. `createFromEvents` implies reconstruction of a new instance, while `catchUp` implies updating an existing one. However, `catchUp` is also present in `AggregateRootBehaviour` and `AggregateRootMetadataAwareBehaviour`, creating a confusing layer of behavior vs. root methods.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Duplicate type definitions for descriptor objects with identical… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent property naming for the same concept.… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent method naming for parallel interfaces.… 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)9.0 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: REDACTED 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 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.1 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

79 finding(s): 0 critical, 75 high, 4 medium, 0 low. 48 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 155 file(s) — `src/Aggregate/AggregateHeader.php` (line 15, line 16, line 17, …), `src/Aggregate/AggregateRootAttributeBehaviour.php` (line 68), `src/Aggregate/CustomIdBehaviour.php` (line 10), `src/Aggregate/RamseyUuidV7Behaviour.php` (line 13), `src/Attribute/Aggregate.php` (line 13), … (+150 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 1 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 26 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (20), REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (26 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 48 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 (48 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities9.4 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security8.2 / 10Adequategated by 4 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

9 finding(s): 0 critical, 4 high, 5 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 4 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
Resolve the 5 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling9.9 / 10Adequategated by 2 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Strongest change-coupling: SubscriptionStatusCommand.php↔DoctrineSubscriptionStore.php 55%; DefaultRepository.php↔DefaultSnapshotStore.php 55%

Boundary-crossing change coupling: SubscriptionStatusCommand.php ↔ DoctrineSubscriptionStore.php · ×2src/Console/Command/SubscriptionStatusCommand.php:1

What to do

Resolve the 2 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with SubscriptionStatusCommand.php, DefaultRepository.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 8 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 0 platform declaration(s) and 14 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)5.2 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

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

What to do

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation 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.

docs/getting-started.md links to `/docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation`, but `docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/getting-started.md:268

What to do

Reconcile the README with reality: docs/getting-started.md links to `/docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation`, but `docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation` does not exist.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P1 · CI/CD gates8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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.

A CI pipeline exists but no build step was matched — changes may merge without the build ever running. A build step may be invoked directly as a command, or declared as a task that a runner named in the pipeline resolves.

What to do

Add an explicit build step to your CI pipeline — your stack's own build command, or, if the pipeline delegates to a task runner, a build task that runner executes in CI — so every change is built before merge.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-php) and a health-check endpoint (Laravel's /up health route or a /health route) for operability.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

What to do

Add a `healthcheck:` to the served compose service — probing the endpoint it already answers on where it has one — with `depends_on: condition: service_healthy` on whatever waits for it, and keep the deployed image tag immutable and recorded so rolling back is re-pointing at the previous tag rather than rebuilding.
Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF1 · Benchmark discipline10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X3 · Exception handling7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. — src/Schema/DoctrineHelper.php:32

What to do

Swallowed exception (empty catch)

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X4 · Structured logging10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X5 · Nullable reference types9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Reference — by lens

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

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	87%	Strong	Solid.
Architecture	85%	Adequate — gated by D26	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity	60%	Adequate — gated by M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	66%	Adequate	Acceptable, with room to improve.
Security	70%	Adequate — gated by D29, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Strongest 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.

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.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 4 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not evidenced — 1 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 64 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX2 Stateful singletons — Not 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
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — mysql Pulling mariadb Pulling postgres Pulling mariadb Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden postgres Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mysql Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: postgres Pulling mysql Pulling mariadb Pulling mysql Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden mariadb Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden postgres Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, 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
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.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
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
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.php), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 155 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D34 Knowledge Freshness — knowledge concentrated in recent work — freshness signal contradicted by repo activity
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.
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 — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 23 value object(s); a Domain/Aggregates/ValueObjects layer
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 only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (1 PHP aggregate(s) recording domain events (recordThat/apply))
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 applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the PHP source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — Doctrine is declared, but the schema-migration mechanism could not be identified. Our limit, not a verdict on this repository.
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
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
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.
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 — 83 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 23 more in this group — see findings.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 1 more in this group — see findings.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D35 · Change Coupling · Boundary-crossing change coupling · ×2

Boundary-crossing change coupling: SubscriptionStatusCommand.php ↔ DoctrineSubscriptionStore.php src/Console/Command/SubscriptionStatusCommand.php:1 — `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionStatusCommand.php` (context Console) and `src/Subscription/Store/DoctrineSubscriptionStore.php` (context Subscription) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 55% of the time (6 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `d592037f` overhaul error handling in projectionist (at that commit the files were still `src/Console/Command/ProjectionStatusCommand.php` and `src/Projection/Projection/Store/DoctrineStore.php`); `0fe3bfb2` rename TransactionalStore into LockableStore (at that commit the files were still `src/Console/Command/ProjectionStatusCommand.php` and `src/Projection/Projection/Store/DoctrineStore.php`); `e258bcfa` fix static analyser (at that commit the files were still `src/Console/Command/ProjectionStatusCommand.php` and `src/Projection/Projection/Store/DoctrineStore.php`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: DefaultRepository.php ↔ DefaultSnapshotStore.php src/Repository/DefaultRepository.php:1 — `src/Repository/DefaultRepository.php` (context Repository) and `src/Snapshot/DefaultSnapshotStore.php` (context Snapshot) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 55% of the time (6 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `a955d156` fix psalm issues; `e9894c84` use metadata in repository, remove bc layer; `15471a89` version snapshots — run `git show` on any of them.

D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×1

REDACTED

Serious — 83 finding(s)

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×8

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×6

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/CommandBus/HandlerFinder.php:61 — src/CommandBus/HandlerFinder.php:61-77 | src/QueryBus/HandlerFinder.php:43-59 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/Cryptography/DoctrineCipherKeyStore.php:84 — src/Cryptography/DoctrineCipherKeyStore.php:84-100 | src/Cryptography/ExtensionDoctrineCipherKeyStore.php:110-126 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:130 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:130-146 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:143-159 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. 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.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:166 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:166-182 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:199-215 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:215 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:215-231 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:252-268 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:215` 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 (17 lines × 2) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:1231 — src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:1231-1247 | src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:1277-1293 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:1231` 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.

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

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×3

TodoComment tests/Unit/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngineTest.php:943 — // TODO: Implement beginBatch() method. — 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 tests/Unit/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngineTest.php:948 — // TODO: Implement commitBatch() method. — 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 tests/Unit/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngineTest.php:953 — // TODO: Implement rollbackBatch() method. — 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.

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:412 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:412-426 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:489-503 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreStream.php:115 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreStream.php:115-129 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStoreStream.php:120-134 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreStream.php:115` 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 (15 lines × 2) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:110 — src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:110-124 | src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:132-146 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:365 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:365-375 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:442-452 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:441` calls `setLength` and `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:364` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Metadata/AggregateRoot/Psr16AggregateRootRegistryFactory.php:23 — src/Metadata/AggregateRoot/Psr16AggregateRootRegistryFactory.php:23-33 | src/Metadata/Event/Psr16EventRegistryFactory.php:23-33 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Metadata/Event/Psr16EventMetadataFactory.php:21 — src/Metadata/Event/Psr16EventMetadataFactory.php:21-31 | src/Metadata/Subscriber/Psr16SubscriberMetadataFactory.php:21-31 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. 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 (18 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:261 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:261-278 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:312-329 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:261` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:302 — src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:302-319 | src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:467-484 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:302` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:33 — src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:33-45 | src/QueryBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:33-45 — `src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php` and `src/QueryBus/HandlerDescriptor.php` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 2 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 25 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:390 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:390-402 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:465-479 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) src/CommandBus/AggregateHandlerProvider.php:38 — src/CommandBus/AggregateHandlerProvider.php:38-44 | src/CommandBus/ServiceHandlerProvider.php:30-36 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:468 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:468-474 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:545-551 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×2

Low cohesion: Lookup (LCOM4 9) src/Subscription/Lookup/Lookup.php:25 — Lookup's methods fall into 9 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 9 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: Message (LCOM4 4) src/Message/Message.php:16 — Message's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · InMemoryStore.filter (cyclomatic 33) · ×1

InMemoryStore.filter (cyclomatic 33) src/Store/InMemoryStore.php:173 — InMemoryStore.filter has cyclomatic complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cyclomatic 19) · ×1

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cyclomatic 19) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:170 — DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cyclomatic 18) · ×1

AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cyclomatic 18) src/Metadata/Subscriber/AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.php:28 — AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run (cyclomatic 17) · ×1

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run (cyclomatic 17) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:359 — DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair · ×1

Repeated repair: src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:162 — src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php changed 3 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 14 (its worst body is StreamDoctrineDbalStore.applyCriteria at line 162), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “Fix mysql/mariadb lock”; “Fix save of multiple messages in a rare case, when keep_index option is active and exactly 7281 messages were saved that the setval was not called”; “Add more store integration tests. These revealed some bugs: * drop index via task could have not worked due to casing issues * dont claim lock idefinelty with mysql/mariadb if lock could not aquire * event criterion passed wrong param type to dbal * cipher key store could return random key for one subject if mutliple existed”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-07-19..2026-10-17, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-19 22:41:09 +02:00' --until='2026-10-17 22:41:09 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · InMemoryStore.filter (cognitive 78) · ×1

InMemoryStore.filter (cognitive 78) src/Store/InMemoryStore.php:173 — InMemoryStore.filter has cognitive complexity 78 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (46 pts), error handling 8 (26 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 52). 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 · AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cognitive 34) · ×1

AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata (cognitive 34) src/Metadata/Subscriber/AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.php:28 — AttributeSubscriberMetadataFactory.metadata has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (30 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 17). 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 · DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cognitive 32) · ×1

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot (cognitive 32) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:170 — DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (23 pts), loops 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DefaultSubscriptionEngine.setup (cognitive 29) · ×1

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.setup (cognitive 29) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:71 — DefaultSubscriptionEngine.setup has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), ternaries 4 (12 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run (cognitive 29) · ×1

DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run (cognitive 29) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:359 — DefaultSubscriptionEngine.run has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (21 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (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 · AttributeAggregateRootMetadataFactory.findApplyMethods (cognitive 26) · ×1

AttributeAggregateRootMetadataFactory.findApplyMethods (cognitive 26) src/Metadata/AggregateRoot/AttributeAggregateRootMetadataFactory.php:230 — AttributeAggregateRootMetadataFactory.findApplyMethods has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (16 pts), loops 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (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 · StreamDoctrineDbalStore.save (cognitive 24) · ×1

StreamDoctrineDbalStore.save (cognitive 24) src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:226 — StreamDoctrineDbalStore.save has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (17 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (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 · DefaultRepository.load (cognitive 21) · ×1

DefaultRepository.load (cognitive 21) src/Repository/DefaultRepository.php:78 — DefaultRepository.load has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (12 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (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 · StreamDoctrineDbalStore.applyCriteria (cognitive 17) · ×1

StreamDoctrineDbalStore.applyCriteria (cognitive 17) src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:162 — StreamDoctrineDbalStore.applyCriteria has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DefaultRepository.save (cognitive 16) · ×1

DefaultRepository.save (cognitive 16) src/Repository/DefaultRepository.php:226 — DefaultRepository.save has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (11 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 1). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate type definitions for descriptor objects with identical signatures in different namespaces. `CommandBus.HandlerDescriptor` and `EventBus.ListenerDescriptor` are structurally identical (name + callable), suggesting a shared base interface or class should be used instead of duplicating the definition. · ×1

Duplicate type definitions for descriptor objects with identical signatures in different namespaces. `CommandBus.HandlerDescriptor` and `EventBus.ListenerDescriptor` are structurally identical (name + callable), suggesting a shared base interface or class should be used instead of duplicating the definition. — Extract a common `HandlerDescriptor` or `CallableDescriptor` interface/class in a shared namespace (e.g., `Message` or `Common`) and have both specific namespaces implement or extend it. (signatures: CommandBus.HandlerDescriptor.name(): string | CommandBus.HandlerDescriptor.callable(): callable | EventBus.ListenerDescriptor.name(): string | EventBus.ListenerDescriptor.callable(): callable)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent property naming for the same concept. `CommandBus.HandlerReference` uses `commandClass` while `QueryBus.HandlerReference` uses `queryClass`. Since both represent the target class for a handler, the property name should be consistent (e.g., `targetClass` or `eventClass`/`commandClass` depending on context, but the pattern should be uniform). · ×1

Inconsistent property naming for the same concept. `CommandBus.HandlerReference` uses `commandClass` while `QueryBus.HandlerReference` uses `queryClass`. Since both represent the target class for a handler, the property name should be consistent (e.g., `targetClass` or `eventClass`/`commandClass` depending on context, but the pattern should be uniform). — Standardize the property name to `targetClass` or ensure both use the specific domain term (`commandClass` vs `queryClass`) consistently if they are distinct types, but currently they are separate classes with different property names for the same role. (signatures: CommandBus.HandlerReference.commandClass: string | QueryBus.HandlerReference.queryClass: string)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent method naming for parallel interfaces. `CommandBus.HandlerProvider` uses `handlerForCommand` while `QueryBus.HandlerProvider` uses `handlerForQuery`. While the domain differs, the interface pattern should ideally be consistent (e.g., `handlerFor` with a generic type or consistent naming convention). · ×1

Inconsistent method naming for parallel interfaces. `CommandBus.HandlerProvider` uses `handlerForCommand` while `QueryBus.HandlerProvider` uses `handlerForQuery`. While the domain differs, the interface pattern should ideally be consistent (e.g., `handlerFor` with a generic type or consistent naming convention). — Rename to `handlerFor` in both, or keep specific names but ensure the interface structure is identical. Given the strict typing, `handlerForCommand` and `handlerForQuery` is acceptable if they are distinct interfaces, but the inconsistency in `HandlerReference` property names above suggests a lack of unified design. (signatures: CommandBus.HandlerProvider.handlerForCommand(commandClass: string): iterable | QueryBus.HandlerProvider.handlerForQuery(queryClass: string): iterable)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent factory method naming. `create` is used for the basic case, while `createWithHeaders` is used for the extended case. Standard PHP/PSR conventions often prefer `from*` or distinct static factories, or at least consistent suffixes. `createWithHeaders` is verbose compared to a potential `withHeaders` instance method (which exists) or a static `fromHeaders`. · ×1

Inconsistent factory method naming. `create` is used for the basic case, while `createWithHeaders` is used for the extended case. Standard PHP/PSR conventions often prefer `from*` or distinct static factories, or at least consistent suffixes. `createWithHeaders` is verbose compared to a potential `withHeaders` instance method (which exists) or a static `fromHeaders`. — Consider using `from` prefix for static factories (e.g., `fromEvent`, `fromEventWithHeaders`) or ensure the naming convention matches the `with*` instance methods. (signatures: Message.Message.create(event: object): self | Message.Message.createWithHeaders(event: object, headers: iterable): self)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Ambiguous intent between `createFromEvents` and `catchUp`. `createFromEvents` implies reconstruction of a new instance, while `catchUp` implies updating an existing one. However, `catchUp` is also present in `AggregateRootBehaviour` and `AggregateRootMetadataAwareBehaviour`, creating a confusing layer of behavior vs. root methods. · ×1

Ambiguous intent between `createFromEvents` and `catchUp`. `createFromEvents` implies reconstruction of a new instance, while `catchUp` implies updating an existing one. However, `catchUp` is also present in `AggregateRootBehaviour` and `AggregateRootMetadataAwareBehaviour`, creating a confusing layer of behavior vs. root methods. — Clarify the separation between the Aggregate Root interface and the Behavior traits. If `catchUp` is for replaying events on an existing instance, it should not be on the Root if the Root is immutable or if `createFromEvents` is the primary reconstruction method. Ensure the distinction between 'reconstructing' and 'replaying' is clear in naming. (signatures: AggregateRoot.createFromEvents(events: iterable, startPlayhead: int): static | AggregateRoot.catchUp(events: iterable))

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×1

ClassTooLong: DefaultSubscriptionEngine src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:32 — ClassTooLong — 781 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 25 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 381 over it, 1.95× 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 · ×1

FileTooLong: Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php — FileTooLong — 807 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 97% of them inside a single declaration: DefaultSubscriptionEngine (32-1390). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 307 over it, 1.61× 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 · ×1

TooManyMethods: Subscription src/Subscription/Subscription.php:10 — TooManyMethods — 34 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 4 over it, 1.13× 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 · MethodTooLong · ×1

MethodTooLong: DefaultSubscriptionEngine.boot src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:170 — MethodTooLong — boot 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.

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (62–63 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (62–63 lines × 2) src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:221 — src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:221-283 | src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:392-453 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php:221` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (50 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (50 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:506 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:506-555 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:583-632 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (41 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (41 lines × 2) src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:33 — src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:33-73 | src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php:35-75 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php` and `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (32 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (32 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:560 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:560-591 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:637-668 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

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

Duplicated block (30 lines × 3) src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:36 — src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:36-65 | src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php:38-67 | src/Console/Command/WatchCommand.php:53-82 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php` and `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:36` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (30 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (30 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:313 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:313-342 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:353-382 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:431 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:431-458 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:508-535 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:347 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:347-359 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:427-437 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:347` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:36 — src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:36-47 | src/EventBus/ListenerDescriptor.php:38-49 | src/QueryBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:36-47 — `src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php` and `src/QueryBus/HandlerDescriptor.php` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 2 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 25 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/CommandBus/HandlerDescriptor.php:36` 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 (9 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:106 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:106-114 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:119-127 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (4–6 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (4–6 lines × 3) src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:81 — src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php:81-86 | src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php:83-88 | src/Console/Command/WatchCommand.php:90-93 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionBootCommand.php` and `src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:490 — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:490-501 | src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php:567-578 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php` and `src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 291 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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.

M1 · Documentation (README) · README may be stale · ×1

README may be stale — 25 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.

X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×1

Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Schema/DoctrineHelper.php:32 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.

Minor — 16 finding(s)

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×4

Duplicated predicate src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:524 — `$platform instanceof MariaDBPlatform && $lockTimeout < 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php, src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:321 — `$platform instanceof MariaDBPlatform || $platform instanceof MySQLPlatform` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php, src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php:407 — `getDatabasePlatform() instanceof PostgreSQLPlatform && class_exists(PDO::class)` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Store/DoctrineDbalStore.php, src/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStore.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php:120 — `store instanceof SubscriptionStore && $this` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Console/Command/SubscriptionRunCommand.php, src/Console/Command/WatchCommand.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.

D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 7 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: src/Subscription/Engine/DefaultSubscriptionEngine.php, src/Repository/DefaultRepository.php, src/Subscription/Subscriber/MetadataSubscriberAccessor.php, src/Subscription/Subscription.php, src/Subscription/Engine/CatchUpSubscriptionEngine.php, src/CommandBus/AggregateHandlerProvider.php, src/Subscription/Engine/ThrowOnErrorSubscriptionEngine.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 (10 single-owned of 46 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; 46 of the 373 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: src/Message/Serializer/DefaultHeadersSerializer.php, src/Subscription/Engine/GapResolverStoreMessageLoader.php, src/Console/Command/DebugCommand.php.

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 1 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (14207 LoC, 373 module-visible types across 40 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.

D28 · Secrets (history) · Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D9 · Test Distribution · Inverted test pyramid · ×1

Inverted test pyramid — Only 0 % of tests are unit tests (0 unit vs 961 integration, 0 BDD); a broader unit base gives faster, more localised feedback.

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.

M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×1

README/code drift docs/getting-started.md:268 — docs/getting-started.md links to `/docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation`, but `docs/event-sourcing-bundle/latest/installation` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.

P1 · CI/CD gates · CI build step not evidenced · ×1

CI build step not evidenced — A CI pipeline exists but no build step was matched — changes may merge without the build ever running. A build step may be invoked directly as a command, or declared as a task that a runner named in the pipeline resolves.

P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No rollback/health safety · ×1

No rollback/health safety — Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1

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

Minor — 18 finding(s)

D10 · Test Quality · Skipped (documented) · ×7

Skipped (documented): testSaveLockTimeout tests/Integration/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:204 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testLockIsAcquiredAgainAfterTimeout tests/Integration/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:243 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testSaveHoldsLockUntilCommit tests/Integration/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:287 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testSaveHoldsLockUntilCommit tests/Integration/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:495 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testSetupSubscriptionCreatesTheNotifyTrigger tests/Integration/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:1207 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testLoadWithOffset tests/Unit/Store/DoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:170 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testLoadWithOffset tests/Unit/Store/StreamDoctrineDbalStoreTest.php:153 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×7

Outdated: doctrine/dbal — `doctrine/dbal` is locked at 4.4.3 but 4.5.0 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^4.4.0` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update doctrine/dbal` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: doctrine/migrations — `doctrine/migrations` is locked at 3.9.7 but 3.9.8 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^3.3.2` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update doctrine/migrations` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: patchlevel/worker — `patchlevel/worker` is locked at 1.5.0 but 1.7.0 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^1.4.0` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update patchlevel/worker` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ramsey/uuid — `ramsey/uuid` is locked at 4.9.2 but 4.9.4 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^4.7.0` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update ramsey/uuid` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: symfony/console — `symfony/console` is locked at v8.0.13 but v8.1.9 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^5.4.32 || ^6.4.1 || ^7.0.1 || ^8.0.0` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update symfony/console` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: symfony/finder — `symfony/finder` is locked at v8.0.8 but v8.1.8 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^5.4.27 || ^6.4.0 || ^7.0.0 || ^8.0.0` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update symfony/finder` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: symfony/type-info — `symfony/type-info` is locked at v8.0.9 but v8.1.8 is the current stable release on Packagist, and it already satisfies the `^7.2.0 || ^8.0.0` constraint declared in composer.json — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `composer update symfony/type-info` and commit the updated REDACTED.

D10 · Test Quality · No assertions (declared) · ×4

No assertions (declared): testInstantiate tests/Unit/Attribute/IdTest.php:16 — This test performs no assertions and its author said so, with the test framework's own declaration for exactly that (PHPUnit `#[DoesNotPerformAssertions]`, which switches off PHPUnit's "This test did not perform any assertions" warning). It is reported for visibility and is NOT counted against this dimension's score: D10 looks for tests that verify nothing unintentionally. Worth a read anyway — such a test passes as long as the code under it does not throw, so if it was meant to check something, the declaration is now hiding that it does not.
No assertions (declared): testInstantiate tests/Unit/Attribute/SetupTest.php:16 — This test performs no assertions and its author said so, with the test framework's own declaration for exactly that (PHPUnit `#[DoesNotPerformAssertions]`, which switches off PHPUnit's "This test did not perform any assertions" warning). It is reported for visibility and is NOT counted against this dimension's score: D10 looks for tests that verify nothing unintentionally. Worth a read anyway — such a test passes as long as the code under it does not throw, so if it was meant to check something, the declaration is now hiding that it does not.
No assertions (declared): testInstantiate tests/Unit/Attribute/SplitStreamTest.php:16 — This test performs no assertions and its author said so, with the test framework's own declaration for exactly that (PHPUnit `#[DoesNotPerformAssertions]`, which switches off PHPUnit's "This test did not perform any assertions" warning). It is reported for visibility and is NOT counted against this dimension's score: D10 looks for tests that verify nothing unintentionally. Worth a read anyway — such a test passes as long as the code under it does not throw, so if it was meant to check something, the declaration is now hiding that it does not.
No assertions (declared): testInstantiate tests/Unit/Attribute/TeardownTest.php:16 — This test performs no assertions and its author said so, with the test framework's own declaration for exactly that (PHPUnit `#[DoesNotPerformAssertions]`, which switches off PHPUnit's "This test did not perform any assertions" warning). It is reported for visibility and is NOT counted against this dimension's score: D10 looks for tests that verify nothing unintentionally. Worth a read anyway — such a test passes as long as the code under it does not throw, so if it was meant to check something, the declaration is now hiding that it does not.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

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

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-6522873e40c443e399dd89d548bdf4bd/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	1	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-6522873e40c443e399dd89d548bdf4bd/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	79	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm .	1	artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	9	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 155 file(s) — `src/Aggregate/AggregateHeader.php`, `src/Aggregate/AggregateRootAttributeBehaviour.php`, `src/Aggregate/CustomIdBehaviour.php`, `src/Aggregate/RamseyUuidV7Behaviour.php`, `src/Attribute/Aggregate.php`, … (+150 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.	0	—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy	disclosure	—	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 Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm .	0	artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json

Run 01a1656c-24a9-724a-b40f-89a925f84ba9 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 87% · Strong ·

At a glance — Architecture · 85% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

At a glance — Maturity · 60% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Adequate ·

At a glance — Security · 70% · Adequate · gated by D29, D36 ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts